Published on Sep 29, 2014 by act4america
Brigitte Gabriel, founder and CEO of ACT for America, opened their annual conference in Washington, D.C. on September 10, 2014, with a rousing speech and a five minute lesson on Islam.
The ACT for America conference was held around September 11 in order to remind our government that they work for the American people and have a duty to protect them from Islamic terrorism. The conference also educated members of Congress about the threat of Islam and honored chapter leaders from various states for the incredible amount of work that they do as soldiers on the ground.
“ACT for America is non-profit, non-partisan, and the nations’ largest grassroots organization devoted to promoting national security and defeating terrorism. ACT for America has 280,000 members organized in more than 890 chapters nationwide and 11 countries worldwide.” The goals of ACT for America are confronting terrorism, preserving the U. S. Constitution, securing the border, energy independence, empowering women – protecting children, and supporting Israel.
Brigitte Gabriel spoke at the Global Anti-Semitism Summit at the United Nations in New York City on September 9, 2014. She addressed the 500 people in attendance with passion and conviction, in defense of Jews worldwide and against the evil of anti-Semitism. She proudly wore a Star of David necklace given to her by the husband of a woman who passed away. She considered Brigitte the champion of freedom from terrorism.
Brigitte described the demonization by the MSM that Jews have committed genocide against the Palestinians, yet the Palestinian population has increased more than 600% since 1948. “Israel must be the most incompetent mass murderer in the history of the world,” she said.
She spoke about the double standard Israel is subjected to every day. It is held to a standard that no other country in the world is held. Human rights are respected in Israel, yet the Human Rights Commission at the United Nations spends most of its time investigating and condemning Israel while they gloss over and ignore the continued human rights violations in Iran, Cuba, China, North Korea, and many other brutal and repressive regimes.
Why is it that the Jewish people do not have the right to exist as a state? Why are the Jewish people denied their history and connection to their land dating back 5775 years? It is anti-Semitism and morally repugnant, she said. Israel has the fundamental right of self-preservation.
Hamas has been waging war on Israel for decades. It is the same war that ISIS wages now against the world. The difference is focus, Gabriel said. ISIS wants a worldwide Caliphate and “They commit genocide in the name of Allah.”
“ISIS is persecuting members of every community they encounter; ISIS is slaughtering Syrians, Lebanese, Christians, Sunnis, Alawites, Kurds, and Yazidis, terrorizing anyone who does not submit to their version of Islam.”
Hamas rejoiced at the death of Israeli children while they glorified the death of their own children. They love death more than they love their own children. “They use them as human shields, wrapping them in nails and strapping bombs on them to detonate in crowded Jewish neighborhoods and shopping centers. They used my own family as human shields by firing rocket propelled grenades from above our shelter, leaving the area quickly and abandoning us to the devastation of return fire.”
Dr. Michael Savage said in his September 15, 2014 broadcast, “If a religion preaches death, dying, and destruction, it is not a religion, it is a death cult.”
Hamas uses schools, mosques, and other civilian locations to fire rockets at Israel. Jews don’t hide behind civilians, they defend themselves. They learned from history that if someone wants to kill them, they mean it. They are now armed and ready to fight for western civilization, for all of us. “Those who seek the extermination of the Jews are not going to stop with the Jews. That should have been the lesson of the Holocaust,” said Gabriel.
Islamic terrorism has turned the entire world into their target. “Evil dwells where courageous men become bystanders, when the informed become silent. ACT for America stands up and defends the Jewish people. Make sure that people of all faiths can live in peace and harmony and that Jews are never persecuted again.”
Gabriel explained that terrorist organizations, whether they call themselves ISIS, Al Qaeda, Hamas, Boko Haram, or the Muslim Brotherhood, operate from the same doctrine and ideology. And the beheadings and killings of Christians and journalists do not indicate that they want to “coexist.”
Expressing her concern over ISIS finding well trained recruits and suicide bombers with lightning speed, she brought up the very real possibility that these operatives have already arrived in our country through our porous southern border, and could walk into a mall and shut down our economy with a small operation of suicide bombers.
Giving the listeners a five minute history of Islam, she explained why “They are not the extreme version of Islam.” They did not change recently from an ideology to a violent ideology, it happened long time ago.
According to Brigitte Gabriel, the Prophet Muhammad tried to preach and recruit followers in his city, Mecca, for 12 years and failed. People did not want to follow him. He then went to Medina, a Jewish hub at the time, to preach his message. If they would accept him, his own people would accept him. In order to preach to the Jews, Muhammad incorporated a lot of the Old Testament into his preaching such as praying two times a day, not eating pork, fasting for Ramadan like the Jews do for Yom Kippur, washing hands before prayers, etc. But the Jews of Medina refused to accept him. That became the turning point into militarism, attacking Jews, killing them, or expelling them from their city. At this point, she said, “Islam changed from a strictly spiritual movement to a military/political movement clothed in religion.”
Read more at Canada Free Press
Published on Sep 20, 2014 by RightSightings2
New ISIS Propaganda Video Appears to Have U.S. Or Canadian Narrator
Editor’s note: The keynote speech below was delivered by Brigitte Gabriel at the United Nations on September 8, 2014 during a symposium on Global Anti-Semitism: A Threat To International Peace And Security.
Ladies and Gentleman,
It is an honor and privilege to be here today speaking in defense of Jews worldwide and against the evils of anti-Semitism. As you notice, I am wearing a Star of David. This necklace was given to me during a book signing in Dallas, TX by a man who lost his beloved wife in a tragic crash. He said to me crying,
“This necklace was my wife’s favorite, she died wearing it. She considered you her hero for your stand for the Jewish people. I want you to have it. Promise me you’ll wear it.”
I couldn’t find a more befitting time to honor her, than now — wearing this Star of David as a Lebanese giving a keynote speech at the United Nation in defense of the Jewish people.
We are here to address the rise of global anti-Semitism.
Ten years ago, Natan Sharansky explained:
“[C]lassical anti-Semitism is aimed at the Jewish people or the Jewish religion, ‘new anti-Semitism’ is aimed at the Jewish state.”
Mr. Sharansky devised what he called the “3D test.” The three Ds are “demonization,” “double standards” and “delegitimization.”
“Demonization” is making bizarre, ugly claims that have no basis in reality. Comparisons between Israel and the Nazis, or assertions that Israel has been committing “genocide” against the Palestinians are examples of “demonization.” Such claims are nonsense. If Israel has been committing “genocide” against the Palestinians, then why has the population of Palestinians increased more than 600% since 1948? Israel must be the most incompetent mass murderer in the history of the world.
When Israel is held to a standard that no other country in the world would be expected to meet, that double standard is itself anti-Semitism. For instance, Israel is a vibrant democracy where human rights are protected and respected. And yet the United Nations’ so-called Human Rights Commission spends most of its time and effort investigating and condemning Israel, while they gloss over or ignore the massive and continuing human rights violations that occur in Iran, Cuba, China and many other brutal repressive autocracies.
Delegitimization of Israel is to assert that, of all the peoples in the world, only the Jewish people do not have a right to statehood. In fact, Israel’s historical, legal and moral right to exist as a Jewish State is a codified principle of international law. This codification is explicitly based on the long, continuous and well-documented connection of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel. To deny the connection of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel is anti-Semitism in its purest form.
But why should anti-Semitism matter to the rest of the world? It should — not merely because it’s morally repugnant, which it most definitely is.
The world should care about anti-Semitism because of fundamental self-preservation.
The stark truth is that the world stands at the edge of a deep, dark precipice. At the bottom lurks another Holocaust that has already begun. This time the genocide is not only against the Jews. The so-called “Islamic State” has made it abundantly clear it can be committed against non Jews. ISIS is persecuting and killing members of every religious, ethnic and nationalist community it encounters.
ISIS is slaughtering Syrians, Iraqis, Lebanese, Palestinians, Christians, Sunnis, Shiites, Alawites, Kurds, Druze, and Yazidis.
ISIS floods the Internet with stomach-churning images and videos of mass executions, severed heads and crucifixions. We see children slaughtered in front of their parents, and parents in front of their children. This viciousness is part of a calculated strategy explicitly intended to terrorize anyone and everyone who does not submit to their version of Islam.
ISIS has officially declared its intent to rule the world. Their founding document, the declaration of their caliphate, bears the modest title of [Arabic], “This Is The Promise of God.” They declare that God promised to Muslims, quote, “leadership of the world and mastership of the earth.” End quote.
Their declaration of a world-wide caliphate reveals their governing philosophy:
“By Allah, if you disbelieve in democracy, secularism, nationalism, as well as all the other garbage and ideas from the west, and rush to your religion and creed, then by Allah, you will own the earth, and the east and west will submit to you.”
Remember, ladies and gentlemen, savagery is not merely their strategy. It is an article of their faith. They commit genocide in the name of Allah.
Israel has been familiar with the concept, and the reality, of genocide in the name of Allah for a long time. The war that ISIS has declared on the world is the same as the war that Hamas has been waging against Israel for decades. The only difference, again, is focus. ISIS seeks a world-wide caliphate. Hamas is focused on the destruction of Israel.
However, their motivation, methods, and morals are the same.
In terms of brutal methods and lack of morals, ISIS has recently shot, hacked and killed its way to the top of the world’s terrorist organizations. Meanwhile Hamas has been committing mind-numbing mass atrocities for decades. They use to wrap their children in dynamite and nails, and send them to blow up Israeli buses and restaurants. They rejoiced at the death of Israeli children, and glorified the death of their own. Today they use them as human shields
I know something about children being used as human shields. In 1976 when I was 11 years old, Palestinians in South Lebanon used me and my family as human shields. They employed exactly the same technique that Hamas uses in Gaza today. They set up artillery or rocket launchers in front of my bomb shelter and fired a barrage towards Israel. They would pack up and run as quickly as possible, leaving my family to the devastation of return fire.
Today, Hamas hides behind human shields on a much larger scale. Hamas routinely uses schools, mosques, hospitals and other civilian locations for weapons storage, missile launch sites, and other military purposes. They fire rockets and mortars from these places with the explicit intention of drawing return fire from the Israelis, hoping that will produce photogenic civilian corpses for display in the media.
Hamas and ISIS share a common motivation. They want to impose Islam. This is in the charter of Hamas as it is in ISIS’s declaration of the “caliphate.” The charter of Hamas declares that “Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it.”
The most revealing words in the Charter of Hamas are a quotation from Islamic scripture:
“The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.” [Hadith of Sahih Muslim, BOOK 41].
But Hamas has a problem.
In Israel, Jews don’t hide behind stones or trees. They stand up and defend themselves. Israelis have learned from history that if someone repeatedly says they’re going to kill you, they mean it. A lesson the world is only now learning.
Seventy years ago the world stood by as the Jews of Europe went up the chimneys. Today, the Jews of Israel aren’t going to go quietly to the slaughter as they sit on the front line of fighting for Western civilization. Those who seek to exterminate the Jews are not going to stop with the Jews. That should have been the lesson of the Holocaust. That must be the lesson of the rise of ISIS.
Once the intentional mass murder of innocent civilians was legitimized against Israel, it was legitimized everywhere, constrained by nothing more than the strong-held beliefs of those who would become the mass murderers. Because the Palestinians were encouraged by most of the world to believe that the murder of innocent Israeli civilians is a legitimate tactic to advance the Palestinian nationalist cause, the Islamists believe that they may commit mass murder anywhere in the world to advance their holy cause. As a result, we suffer from a plague of Islamic terrorism, from Moscow to Madrid, from Bali to Beslan, from Nairobi to New York, authored and perfected by the Palestinians. Israel and the United States are not separate targets of Islamic terrorism. The whole world is their target.
Evil dwells when courageous men become bystanders. Lies spread when the informed become silent. Society deteriorates when apathy replaces activism. Tyranny comes when leaders become mediocre and haters become organized.
Today we are summoned to lead in our communities and our nations. We are summoned to wake up the apathetic and inspire the despaired, to silence the liars and educate the concerned, to speak tolerance instead of resentment, forgiveness instead of revenge, love instead of hate, and peace instead of war. We are here at the United Nations today because each one of us is a leader and an instrument of change with history as our final judge.
I, as the leader of ACT! for America.org, the largest national security organization in America with chapters in 11 countries around the world, am committed to do whatever possible to stand up with the Jewish people and defend them.
The civilized world must band together in solidarity to ensure that people of all faiths can live in peace and harmony and that Jews are never persecuted and victimized by barbaric, murderous ideologies ever again. That Jews can walk in any street in the world with their head held high and safe. That Israel, the Jewish state, the only democracy in the Middle East, continues to shine as a beacon of light in the darkest region in the world.
- UN houses, but does not sponsor, anti-Semitism conference with keynote by Brigitte Gabriel (counterjihadreport.com)
Times of Israel, by BY CATHRYN J. PRINCE, Sep. 9, 2014:
UNITED NATIONS, NY — On the third floor of the United Nations, just two doors down from the Security Council, more than 500 people gathered this week for a conference on the rise of anti-Semitism. For some, the location was a touch ironic
Because it wasn’t the UN that decided to address the threat global anti-Semitism posed to international peace and security. Rather, it was the UN Permanent Mission of Palau and the Aja Eze Foundation that sponsored the lunchtime conference.
“But why couldn’t the UN, founded on the ashes of the Jewish people, and presently witnessing a widespread resurgence in anti-Semitism, sponsor a conference on combating global anti-Semitism?” said Anne Bayefsky, director of the Touro Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust. “The answer is clear: Because the United Nations itself is the leading global purveyor of anti-Semitism.”
Bayefsky was one of eight panelists who urged the international community to recognize that as anti-Semitism rises, global security falls. They said failure to act against such bigotry enables ISIS and other fundamental Islamic groups.
The conference came after a summer that saw a sharp uptick in anti-Semitic incidents due to Israel’s war against Hamas, according to the Jerusalem-based World Zionist Organization. In July there were approximately 318 anti-Semitic incidents, compared to 66 over the same period in 2013. This represents a nearly 400 percent increase.
During July 2014, Europe saw a 436% increase, while the US saw a 130% rise. There was a 1,200% increase in anti-Semitic acts in South America and a 600% rise in South Africa, according to the organization.
“Where is the outrage? Where are the universal condemnations?” said Ambassador Ron Prosor, Permanent Representative of Israel to the United Nations, Prosor said. “The silence is very similar to the silence of the 1930s and we all have a responsibility to stand up and fight.
“Will you stand with those who fire rockets, kidnap girls out of classrooms, and cut off the heads of journalists? Or will you stand up for freedom?” said Prosor.
Thousands in the United Kingdom and Germany recently demonstrated against a wave of anti-Semitic incidents. And US Secretary of State John Kerry met with Jewish leaders to “reiterate the US government’s deep concern about the prevalence and pervasiveness of anti-Semitic threats and attacks against Jewish individuals, houses of worship, and businesses during the past few months,” according to the US State Department.
Still more must be done, said panelists. To start, the UN must change its stance regarding Israel.
“Every nation has a right to protect themselves, yet most condemn Israel’s right to protect itself. Many condemn genocide yet do not do anything against those who seek to annihilate Israel,” said Dr. Caleb Otto, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Palau to the United Nations.
However, the UN disproportionally singles Israel out among its 193 members, Bayefsky said.
For example, the UN Human Rights Council condemned Israel in 50 resolutions between 2006 and 2014, more than the rest of the entire world. Of all the 2013 General Assembly resolutions criticizing specific countries for human rights abuses, 70% were about Israel.
This kind of institutionalized anti-Semitism not only threatens Israel, it threatens regional stability, said Mark Langfan, Arutz Sheva UN Correspondent/Security Analyst.
To make his case, Langfan presented a graphic analysis of the strategic dangers to Israel and the world. The New York-based attorney said Israel is of critical strategic importance. It is a bulwark against the Islamic fundamentalism threatening to sweep across the Middle East and into southern Europe.
“Israel’s fight today will be the world’s fight tomorrow,” Langfan said.
He said a strong Israel protects Lebanon, Jordan and moderate Muslim nations from falling to groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah and ISIS.
Wearing a Star of David, Brigitte Gabriel, founder, CEO and president of ACT! For America, decried those who questioned Israel’s right to defend itself during Operation Protective Edge. She said she found that appalling given that Hamas’ charter calls for Israel’s destruction.
“But Hamas has a problem because in Israel Jews don’t hide behind stones and trees. In Israel Jews have learned that when someone says they are going to kill you they mean it,” Gabriel said.
The twice-published author said standing against this “institutionalized” anti-Semitism is to oppose terrorist groups such as Hamas and ISIS.
Pastor Mario Bramnick, Chief Liaison for Israel and the National Hispanic Christian Leadership, said visitors to the UN “will see Israel falsely portrayed as a murderer, an illegitimate occupier and a baby killer.” They see a nation charged with apartheid and genocide.
Regardless of faith, race or creed, people must not be silent in the face of anti-Semitic and anti-Israel vitriol, Bramnick said to a standing ovation.
And so, Bramnick said, three days before the thirteenth anniversary of 9/11 and just over two weeks before Rosh Hashanah, it’s time to act, and do what was done in Biblical times to signal danger.
“If there ever was a time to sound the shofar,” Bramnick said, “it is now.”
Published on Sep 3, 2014 by apeacet
As global anti-Semitism is gaining momentum, Jewish leadership is failing. The new anti-Semitism masquerades as anti-Zionism or anti-Israelism. It is fueled by hatred of Jews and Judeo-Christian humanism. It is promoted by violent mobs of Muslim immigrants in the West. It has the full support of Leftist infrastructure in the media, the universities, NGOs and certain Christian churches. When you see Americans turning on fellow Americans, how would you respond?
Published on Aug 24, 2014 by Steven Laboe
Judge Jeanine Pirro’s Opening Statement blasts Obama for playing golf instead of dealing with ISIS.
Is ISIS Already Here?
Published on Aug 24, 2014 by Steven Laboe
Brigitte Gabriel joins Judge Jeanine to address the domestic terrorist threat by ISIS upon U.S. soil.
- ISIS IS IN THE US (dmldaily.com) -
And now we have ISIS. The terror group that will stop at nothing to destroy our nation. I know they are here. I know this because there is a congressional report from 2012 that states the drug cartels are working with terror networks. I know it because I have seen places along the border where the fence has been cut down on 50 separate occasions to allow huge trucks of drugs to drive through. Despite all the technology and border patrol station presence, not once has a truck been stopped. I understand that Anthrax, the makings for dirty bombs, radio-active material and explosive devices can be smuggled across the border without anyone or anything stopping the evil folks who smuggle them through.
I know what I know, and I have been ahead of this story for years. It’s a matter of time before a city is destroyed. I guess the only line of defense you have at this point is prayer. Pray it isn’t your city.
by Noga Gur-Arieh:
Brigitte Gabriel (49,) a bestselling author, activist, a leading expert on global Islamic terrorism, and founder and President of ACT! for America, has one fascinating life story. She was born in Lebanon to a Maronite Christian family, and spent her childhood in amid the Lebanese Civil War. When she was 10, Islamic/Palestinian militants launched an assault on a Lebanese military base near her family house, destroying her home leaving her wounded. She then spent seven years living underground in a bomb shelter, with no sanitary systems, electricity or running water.
Her only life line was Israel who provided medical help, and protection during those years in the bomb shelter. Later in 1982 when Israel invaded Lebanon her mother was seriously injured by Muslim/Palestinian rocket and was taken to Zefat hospital for treatment. For her mother it was a life saving experience, for Brigitte it was a life changing experience. Gabriel was surprised by the humanity shown by the Israelis to their enemies who were brought there for treatment such as the Palestinian and Muslims terrorists, in contrast to the constant propaganda against the Jews she saw as a child.
She moved to Israel in 1984 and worked as news anchor for World News, an Arabic-language evening news broadcast of Middle East Television based in Jerusalem. In 1989 she immigrated to the United States. After 911 Brigitte realized that the Islamic radicals she thoughts left behind in the Middle East have now come to America. She launched ACT! for America a non-profit, non partisan organization that educates and empowers citizens to help play a role in enhancing public safety. Today,ACT! has 280,000 members and 875 chapters nationwide including chapters in 11 countries around the world.
You were born in Lebanon, in times of constant war with Israel. What did you feel about Israel and Israelis as a child, and when did your opinion change?
“By the time I was born into Lebanon the population had shifted from majority Christians to majority Muslims because of the Islamic birth rate. That situation was aggravated by the influx of Palestinian refugees who were majority Muslims. That tipped the scale and brought the haters of Israel together hoping to use Lebanon as a launching pad to attack Israel and drive the Jews into the sea. The only thing standing in their way was Lebanese democracy.
As a child I was surrounded by voices on television nightly news and news radio talking about the horrible things the Israelis were doing to the “poor Palestinians”. At my home, however, hatred was never taught nor practiced. I lived in the Christian town of Marjayoun on the border with Israel.
In 1975 the combined forces of the PLO and the Muslims bombed my home bringing it down burying me under the rubble wounded. I ended up in a hospital for two and half months and later ended up living in a bomb shelter with my parents for 7 years till 1982 when Israel invaded Lebanon.
Since 1975 as we were surrounded and bombed daily and nightly by the PLO/Muslim armies, and Israel was our only life line. Few people from my town went to Israel and begged for help. Israel started coming in the middle of the night bringing food for the children, as well as blankets, bombs shelters and weapons for the Christian military. So since I was a 10 year old child I knew that Israel was our friend and protector from the Islamists and PLO. However in the rest of Lebanon, they looked at Israel as the invader and looked at us as traitors working with the enemy. “
Can you tell a little bit about your childhood in Lebanon? About a leadership that worshiped violence and called for death to the Jews?
“The first 10 years of my life were ideal. I was born into a very civilized country. Beirut was Paris of the Middle East. Lebanon was the Switzerland of the Middle East. Because of the influence of the majority Christians who were good in business, in education, in the arts as well as great hospitable warm people who valued life and family Lebanon prospered. Unfortunately, Lebanon was the only small Christian country in the Middle East and had bought into the whole Arab nationalism thinking if we side with the Arabs we will be protected as “Arabs” as a part of the “Arab Ummah,” Arab nation. The Christians in Lebanon learned the hard way that we were all along considered infidels due to our Judeo Christian heritage.
Despite all that, the culture of worship of death is only an Islamic culture and progressively got worse as the Muslims expanded and drove the Christians out of Lebanon, and now we see out of the Middle East whether in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Bethlahem or Egypt. Today’s Christians in Lebanon would leave in a heart beat if they were able to. The ones who are still there are stuck.”
What brought you to fight against radical Islam and its impacts of Western Civilization?
“I am an eye witness to terror. I am the Anne Frank who lived to tell about it. I know what happens where people turn a blind eye to terror thinking it is not going to happen to me, it is all the way over there. Now that I live in America, I came from “over there”. After September 11th I realized that those radicals I left over there have followed me here. On September 11th my two young daughters came home from school as I was glued to the TV screen watching the images fo the attacks of that day, watching the images of the World Trade Center collapse crying. My youngest daughter looked at me and asked “Mommy why did they do this to us?”. She reminded me of me as a child her age, laying in a hospital bed in Lebanon, looking up at my father asking him the same question. My father’s answer was: “They hate us because we are Christians. The Muslims consider us infidels and they want to kill us.”
I learned since I was a 10 year old little girl that I was wanted dead simply because of the faith I was born into. I had to look into my daughter’s eyes and repeat to her what my daddy told me: “They hate us because they consider us infidels and they want to kill us.” That day was my defining moment. That day I was born as an activist. That day I vowed that I will do everything I can to make sure that my daughter will never have to look into her child’s eyes and tell him or her what my daddy told me and what I had to repeat to her. That day I found my purpose!”
What is your final goal? What are you trying to achieve?
“I am trying to wake up Americans to stand up against evil. When evil goes unchecked, Evil grows like a monster and spreads worldwide. When Christian blood was shed on the streets of Beirut and Jewish blood was shed on the streets of Tel Aviv no one cared. Today innocent people’s blood is being shed all over the world by the same hatred driven radicals who have no conscious, who are willing to kill their own children in order to kill those of us whom they consider infidels. I want to ignite a fire in the heart of every apathetic person to make them realize their responsibility to the universe and to each other as human beings to stop evil whenever we see it, identify it and fight it.
I do not come to this from a Christian point of view. I come to this as a human being and a citizen of the world who has a moral duty to be kind to others and treat others the way I want to be treated and make sure we leave this world a better place than we found it for our children and their children. As someone who comes from the Middle East I appreciate the freedom that America’s constitution gives me to express my views and rally others to stand up and speak up against evil.”
Read more at Jewish Journal
Brigitte Gabriel supports Israel as the vanguard against Islamism:
Uploaded on Apr 30, 2010 by DemoCast
Washington Times , Brigitte Gabriel, June 26, 2014:
There is a great deal of confusion and ignorance about the jihadist organization ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) which has been waging a terror campaign in those two nations for some time now, culminating most recently in the seizure of Iraq’s second largest city, Mosul.
This is very important to understand because this is a common goal of all the major jihadist organizations across the world. It is shared by al Qaeda, Hamas, Lashkar e Taiba, Abu Sayyef, Jemaah Islamiyah, Boko Haram, Al Shabaab and others. The shared goal transcends any disagreements over borders and pure politics.
For instance, Israel could evaporate tomorrow and the overriding goal of the formation of Islamic states ruled by Shariah would not change a bit. It’s based in their thousand-year-old doctrine, which is far more fundamental and overarching than mere political ideology.
If we ever hope to win this war against radical Islam we better understand that the goal of establishing an Islamic state ruled by Shariah is based on doctrine and not just ideology.
Islamic doctrine is not derived from the thoughts or ideological vision of a man or woman brought to the fore in recent years. Islamic doctrine is based on the Islamic trilogy, the Koran, the Hadith and the Sira.
The Koran is the central religious text of Islam, believed by Muslims to be a direct revelation from Allah. The Hadith is a series of traditions documenting the teachings, deeds and sayings of the prophet Muhammad. The Sira is the biography of Muhammad, considered to have been the perfect man who set an example for all Muslims to follow always. In order for an individual to be a good Muslim, it is not enough for him to worship Allah, he must worship Allah in the same way that Muhammad did.
The name given to Islamic doctrine is Shariah. Not only does Shariah form the basis of the doctrine to which jihadists, such as those of ISIS, adhere, it is also the common goal of jihadists to establish rule by Shariah in an Islamic state.
All other considerations — economic, political and military — take a back seat to adhering to and establishing Shariah.
It is this doctrinal basis that is the key to understanding the threat from jihad.
Too often the West becomes tied up in contemporary considerations and issues that have nothing to do with doctrine and assign too much significance to them.
Islamic doctrine — Shariah — transcends geography, politics and even different Islamic sects. It is the common thread that ties Boko Haram in Nigeria to ISIS in Iraq and Abu Sayyef in the Philippines to Lashkar e Taiba in Kashmir.
Jihad is not a local phenomenon. When a variety of terrorist groups all wage violence for the same reasons, with the same goals, this should be considered a clue that there is something more at work here than just “local” conflicts.
Make no mistake — ISIS does not just pose a threat to Iraq. History has shown that when an Islamic state ruled by Shariah is established, such as Taliban Afghanistan, that state becomes a launching pad for jihad elsewhere.
Already we have seen reports that American jihadis have joined ISIS to fight alongside jihadists from around the globe. While the conflict in Iraq is portrayed in the Western media as a civil war, the truth is that most of the ISIS fighters are not Iraqi. They are jihadi warriors from around the world, including from the West.
What happens when these jihadists head home? Will they leave the war behind in Iraq and Syria? Or will they bring jihad home?
In warfare, your enemy’s reality becomes your reality and you must go to great lengths to understand your enemy. Unfortunately, we have largely failed on that score as a nation.
Our elected and appointed officials must come to terms with the doctrinal basis for jihad so we can properly and effectively defend America, protect American lives and face our enemies.
Brigitte Gabriel is an international terrorism analyst and the president of ACT for America.org.
By Billy Hallowell:
Author and terrorism expert Brigitte Gabriel is accusing CNN of “completely editing” and misrepresenting her views during a prerecorded interview that aired on Sunday’s “Reliable Sources.”
Gabriel clashed with Linda Sarsour, director of the Arab American Association of New York, during the segment in question, battling over purported “fear-mongering” and Gabriel’s views on Islamic extremism.
Waging allegations of selective editing on her Facebook page Sunday, Gabriel said that some of her explanations during the discussion were axed in an effort to fit an agenda.
“It was discouraging that Reliable Sources, a CNN show about media bias, biasly edited this pre-taped interview between me and Linda Sarsour,” she wrote. “They edited the discussion down to fit their usual pro Islamist bias.”
She continued: “They couldn’t publicly let me dominate the debate, therefore the best parts were left on the cutting room floor, including irrelevant and hostile comments by Linda Sarsour — when my logical arguments were going against her.”
Gabriel then shared some of the sentiments she claims were cut out of the discussion, noting that she had highlighted there are currently 44 conflicts between Muslims and non-Muslims raging across the globe. Sarsour, she said, was so angry that at one point she reportedly called Gabriel a “bigot,” forcing host Brian Stelter “to stop her.”
While Gabriel claimed CNN filmed for 30 minutes, the appearance ended up being 11 minutes long, though it is not uncommon for media outlets to tape and then pare down segments to fit programmatic needs.
In the final clip that aired Sunday, Gabriel is seen echoing recent comments she’s made about Islam, questioning where moderate Muslims are in addressing rampant extremism around the globe. The initial comments came in response to a Muslim student’s question at a Heritage Foundation forum about Benghazi.
“The moderate Muslims, they can organize. Where are their collective voices?,” she asked. “Where are the voices of the moderate Muslims speaking when girls kidnapped by Boko Haram disappear and we still do not know where they are?”
Sarsour responded that there are many moderate Muslims that speak out, but suggested that they aren’t always given media coverage.
“There are people out there that stood up on Boko Haram, on terrorism, on 9/11. There are national Muslim organizations who continue to day in and day out put out statements,” Sarsour said. “Is the media covering it? I don’t have control over the media to cover these stories.”
But she wasn’t done there. The activist seemingly took Gabriel’s comments personally, adding: “And I don’t have to prove to anyone that I am an American, born and praised in Brooklyn, New York, and that my parents chose to come to the United States.”
Watch the heated clash below:
Read more at The Blaze
In the first video they seem to agree on the nature of threat from the rise in Islamic terrorism and lack of moderate Muslim condemnation of it. In the second video however a point of contention arises over why moderates are not speaking out. Zuhdi believes it is due to a lack of committed, sustained American leadership to help Muslims “evolve into a Jeffersonian type Democracy” over a period of generations (nation building) “Brigitte is shaking her head “No”. She says you must first confront the ideology driving radicalization. Watch…
Brigitte Gabriel Explains the Rise of Jihad
Why has jihadist threat escalated in last 3 years?
By Andrew Harrod:
Despite Ahmed answering with a willingness to lead any such movement, her past provokes deeply disturbing questions about oft-sought “moderate Muslims” and their ability to counter aggressive Islamic agendas.
Having previously met, the veiled Ahmed smiled to me in the audience during the first panel of a June 16 seminar on the September 11, 2012 attack upon America’s Benghazi, Libya, consulate.
“How can we fight an ideological war with weapons?” was Ahmed’s not particularly pertinent audience question for the panel.
Ahmed argued that “we portray Islam and all Muslims as bad” while 1.8 billion followers of Islam remained unrepresented on the panel. Agreeing with Ahmed’s emphasis on ideology, Center for Security Policy President Frank Gaffney’s response distinguished between personally pious Muslims and a faith-based political agenda of brutal sharia law.
That Ahmed “stood there to make a point about peaceful, moderate Muslims” while showing no interest in the panel’s discussion of a lethal attack against Americans, however, irritated national security activist Brigitte Gabriel.
“We are not here to bash Muslims… I am glad you are here,” Gabriel stated before asking to a standing ovation, “but where are the others speaking out?”
Gabriel cited intelligence estimates from various countries rating 15-25 percent of Muslims worldwide as radicals, a group perhaps as large as the American population.
“Most Germans were peaceful, yet the Nazis drove the agenda,” Gabriel argued in describing the outsized influence of a militant minority such as jihadists. Just as the peaceful majority were irrelevant in imperial Japan and Communist dictatorships such as in China and the Soviet Union.
“It is time that we take political correctness and throw it in the garbage where it belongs” Gabriel announced to cheers.
Following this exchange Ahmed left, giving evidence to suspicions that she merely wanted to make a point and not attend the event. Subsequent reception discussion revealed multiple observations of Ahmed’s appearance at other Washington, D.C. events involving Islam. One person noted that Ahmed at another event had similarly unilaterally raised the subject of anti-Muslim hostility.
Curiosity about my casual acquaintance Ahmed prompted by the Heritage event initiated a revealing internet search. An online interview deepened my limited knowledge of Ahmed, a woman raised in Rawalpindi, Pakistan, by an upper-middle class family before coming Oregon with her family at age 12.
Read more at The Blaze
On a special Hannity, Sean welcomed a panel of national security experts and commentators to examine the rise of radical Islam.
Sean asked Michael Ghouse, from the America Together Foundation, if he thinks enough moderate Muslims are speaking out against extremists who are hijacking his religion.
“They’re not loud enough. We need to gather momentum. Shows like yours have given voices to moderate Muslims like me,” he said.
Things quickly escalated when Fox News contributor Tamara Holder blasted Act for America President Brigitte Gabriel as the “most dangerous person in society.” [Tamara begins at 9 min. into the video and Jamie Glazov gives a a fantastic rebuttal at about 12 min.]
“To say things like moderate Muslims are ‘supposedly’ not terrorists, ‘supposedly’ are not dangerous – the majority of Muslims in this country and in this world are safe, loving people who want peace. Those Nigerian girls were Muslims as well,” Holder said.
Gabriel defended her stance, saying, “I’m not saying the majority of Muslims are terrorists. […] The terrorists are only 15 to 25 percent.”
Holder shot back, saying that percentage is much lower and charged Gabriel with spewing hate.
Go to 32 minutes into the video to see Jamie Glazov courageously stand up to Mike Gouse and Tamara Holder when they try to prevent him from criticizing Islam.
Accuracy in Media, June 17, 2014, By James Simpson:
The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank wrote a column on Monday titled “Heritage’s ugly Benghazi panel,” portraying a forum held the same day at the Heritage Foundation, hosted by the newly formedBenghazi Accountability Coalition, as nothing more than an anti-Islamic hate-fest. This was a serious panel with numerous, widelyrecognized experts, a couple of whom were also members of Accuracy in Media’s Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi. CCB’s April report, “How America Switched Sides in the War on Terror,” madeinternational headlines.
That report took some serious skin. Diane Sawyer, Bob Woodward, and other stalwarts of the mainstream media, have taken Hillary Clinton to task over Benghazi. With Heritage and others now picking up the baton, something clearly needed to be done. They can’t have Hillary’s chances in 2016 threatened by that Benghazi “old news.” As Hillary herself said, “What difference, at this point, does it make!?”
Enter Dana Milbank, WaPo’s hit “journalist,” who sees Joseph McCarthy, and racist bigots behind every conservative door. He could not, and did not, dispute the facts raised during this afternoon-long forum. Instead he used a now-standard device of the left when confronted with uncomfortable truths. The discussion and topic was discredited by simply describing what was said in a presumptuous and mocking tone. It is a clever way to discredit facts in the reader’s mind without actually disputing the facts. So for example, he wrote:
“The session, as usual, quickly moved beyond the specifics of the assaults that left four Americans dead to accusations about the Muslim Brotherhood infiltrating the Obama administration, President Obama funding jihadists in their quest to destroy the United States, Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton attempting to impose Shariah blasphemy laws on Americans and Al Jazeera America being an organ of ‘enemy propaganda.’”
Most of the above, of course, is true. President Obama did fund the Libyan opposition, which was known to have al Qaeda ties, and those same jihadists turned around and attacked the Benghazi Special Mission Compound, killing Americans. He blatantly supported the Muslim Brotherhood in the misnamed Egyptian “Arab Spring” where one of America’s most reliable Muslim allies, Hosni Mubarak, was deposed.
Obama and Clinton are certainly doing nothing to stop the spread of Shariah in America, and the Muslim Brotherhood has infiltrated the Obama administration.Another report out Monday quoted Mohamed Elibiary, an advisor to the Homeland Security Department and Muslim Brotherhood supporter, writing in a tweet, “As I’ve said b4, inevitable that ‘Caliphate’ returns…” Finally, anyone even remotely familiar with Al Jazeera knows it is an Islamist propaganda organ. The fact that it occasionally does a better job of reporting news than the American mainstream media is simply a reflection of just how bad the American media have become.
But apparently Milbank’s job is not to delve into the facts. Instead, his job is to discredit Obama’s detractors. So he used another standard leftist device as well. He found a convenient straight man to play the victim, innocently asking questions and making statements designed to provoke a predictable response, which could then be attacked with the usual leftist rhetoric. In this case, he utilized a Muslim woman named Saba Ahmed. He wrote, “Saba Ahmed, an American University law student, stood in the back of the room and asked a question in a soft voice…” He quoted her as saying:
“We portray Islam and all Muslims as bad, but there’s 1.8 billion followers of Islam… We have 8 million-plus Muslim Americans in this country and I don’t see them represented here.”
So, of course, the fact that the forum was not packed with Muslims implies it had to be biased. Substitute “white privilege,” “racism,” “McCarthyism,” or any of the other familiar leftist shibboleths. If you can’t discredit the message, smear the messengers. Ahmed also performed another, perhaps more important service, she changed the subject away from the disaster that was Benghazi and forced the panel to make it all about her bogus concerns.
As described by Milbank, one of the participants, Brigitte Gabriel, immediately “pounced” on Ahmed. Gabriel, who grew up in Lebanon during the civil war and saw first hand what the Islamists did there, founded Act for America to educate Americans on the threat from radical Islam.
Except that Gabriel didn’t pounce. She didn’t even respond. A partial video of the forum, posted at Media Matters of all places, and reposted at Mediaite.com revealed that instead, Center for Security Policy President Frank Gaffney gave a very measured, careful and respectful response. Then Gabriel “pounced.” But even then she didn’t pounce at all. Finally, Milbank selectively edited Ahmed’s question as well. He mischaracterized the entire exchange, which was very respectful. Here is the video.
Milbank described Gabriel’s response to Ahmed as though it was the height of absurdity. He selectively reported her response that “180 million to 300 million” Muslims are “dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization,” that the “peaceful majority were irrelevant in the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001… Most Germans were peaceful, yet the Nazis drove the agenda and as a result, 60 million died.”
This is all true as well. The peaceful Muslims—and there are no doubt many—are just as passive and impotent as everyday Germans were while the Nazis were killing Jews during WW II, but Milbank made it sound as though she had committed a crime: “she drew a Hitler comparison,” he gasped. What is wrong with that? It is a good analogy. He didn’t mention all the other analogies she drew, including mass murder committed by Japanese and Soviet communists, where the people were similarly powerless.
But we must ask a larger question. What was Saba Ahmed, the innocent, soft-spoken American University “student,” doing there? It turns out Ahmed is more than just a “student.” She has a lobbying firm in Washington, DC. She once ran for Congress while living in Oregon, where she went missing for three days over a failed relationship, according to family members.
She came to the aid of a family friend, the Christmas tree bomber, who attempted to set off a vanload of explosives in a downtown Portland park where Christmas revelers were celebrating. The bomb was actually a dummy, part of an FBI sting investigation.
After losing the Democratic primary, she even switched sides, becoming a registered Republican. But she never switched loyalties. She spoke against the war in Iraq at an Occupy rally in Oregon, has worked on the staff of Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy (VT) and has been a Democratic activist for a long time—not exactly the innocent “student” portrayed by Milbank. A 2011 article describing her odd Congressional campaign stated:
Ahmed, who says she’s been recently lobbying Congress to end U.S. military involvement in Afghanistan, said that ‘Obviously I am not a traditional politician.’
Milbank characterized it all as a pile-on against this one meek, lone voice of reason. He went on to further ridicule the forum and its participants, observing among other things:
“[Talk show host and panel moderator, Chris] Plante cast doubt on whether Ambassador Chris Stevens really died of smoke inhalation, demanding to see an autopsy report.
(Many claim he was raped and tortured. An autopsy report would settle the issue, but of course the Obama administration won’t release it.)
“Gabriel floated the notion that Stevens had been working on a weapons-swap program between Libya and Syria just before he was killed.”
(That was apparently the real reason behind the entire fiasco.)
“Panelist Clare Lopez of the Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi said the perpetrators of the attack are ‘sipping frappes with journalists in juice bars.’”
This last comment was particularly outrageous. Milbank makes Lopez’s statement sound absurd, worthy of ridicule, but in fact CNN located the suspected ringleader of the terrorists involved in the Benghazi attack and interviewed him for two hours at a prominent hotel coffee bar in Benghazi. FBI Director James Comey was grilled in a Congressional hearing about it. Congressmen Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) demanded to know how CNN could locate the terrorists so easily while the FBI couldn’t. Just today it was reported that that same suspected ringleader of the attack on the compound in Benghazi, Ahmed Abu Khatallah, was captured in Libya and is being brought to the U.S. on a ship.
Lopez is a former career CIA case officer and expert on the Middle East. Yet here is Milbank trying to make her look like some kind of yahoo. But one doesn’t have to dig too deep to discover who the real yahoo is.
Milbank’s trump card was Ahmed. It was almost certainly a setup. Milbank found an activist he knew could play her part well. She feigned a humble, meek, ignorant college student who made a single observation and became the “victim,” whose harsh treatment Milbank could then excoriate, while discrediting a panel of distinguished experts that included Gabriel, Lopez, Andrew McCarthy—who prosecuted the case against the Blind Sheikh, the World Trade Center bombing mastermind—and many others.
Meanwhile, the pink elephant in the room was the massive intelligence, military, foreign policy and leadership failure that Benghazi represents for the Obama administration, and by extension, the absolutely inexcusable incompetence—or worse—of Hillary Clinton’s State Department.
Like most of the Democrats’ media shills, Dana Milbank lies quite well, but they are lies nonetheless. We are well advised to recognize them as such. Hillary Clinton should not be allowed anywhere near the White House. She, along with Obama and many other Democrats, should instead find themselves under the microscope in a serious criminal investigation. I won’t hold my breath, however.
James Simpson is an economist, businessman and investigative journalist. His articles have been published at American Thinker, Accuracy in Media,Breitbart, PJ Media, Washington Times, WorldNetDaily and others. His regular column is DC Independent Examiner. Follow Jim on Twitter & Facebook
WASHINGTON – After all is said and done, the Benghazi scandal boils down to just the same two key questions as those in the Watergate scandal: What did the president know? And, when did he know it?
That’s according to a man who used to guard the president for a living, former secret service agent Dan Bongino, author of the WND bestseller, “Life Inside the Bubble,” and current candidate to represent Maryland in Congress.
Bongino strongly suggested the answers to those questions will show President Obama just as responsible for the scandal as President Nixon was for his. The difference was, he said, people died in Benghazi.
Parodying the phrase used by former Secretary of Stare Hillary Clinton, Bongino rhetorically asked, “What difference does it make?” He then answered by saying four men were killed and nothing was done to help them.
The man who used to personally guard the president was one of more than a dozen expert panelists convened by the Heritage Foundation and the Benghazi Accountability Coalition for a four-hour examination of the scandal called, “Benghazi: The Difference it Makes is Accountability.”
The purpose of the live-streamed conference was to inform Americans of details they have not heard from the establishment media and to provide information for the House select committee on Benghazi to be chaired by Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C.
Bongino called it “media malpractice of the highest order” that the most basic questions were not asked, and that the real conspiracy was the establishment media silence.
He promised he would stop talking about the anti-Islamic video the administration has tried to blame for the attack, if the mainstream media would find the answer to one question: “Where was the president on the night of the attack?”
“We know he was not in the situation room, thanks to Tommy Vietor, the ‘Benghazi was like two years ago, dude.’ And the situation room is where situations (like this) are handled.”
Retired Army Gen. Jerry Boykin said he was tired of hearing that U.S. rescue forces couldn’t have arrived on time and there was no way to save the four Americans who died in Benghazi that night.
“This is not just about lives lost,” he said. “This is about who we are. We have a fundamental ethos. We don’t leave people behind.”
Boykin said critics had asked him whether that applied to Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, who was swapped for five top Taliban commanders.
“A deserter is not a fallen comrade. There’s a big difference,” he instructed the audience, who responded with an enthusiastic round of applause.
Boykin described the history of how the U.S. military created special rescue forces, after the failed rescue attempt of the U.S. hostages in Iran, under President Jimmy Carter.
“We let four people die without any effort to save or retrieve them,” he said. “We had forces designed for this kind of situation, so what happened? Why was there no response?”
Frank Gaffney, president of the Center for Security Policy, said blaming the attack by well-organized terrorists on a spontaneous uprising of people upset over a video was “a singular affront to intelligence of the American people.”
He said the president himself blamed the video while speaking to the United Nations “weeks after it was known to be untrue,” and he also noted the president told the U.N., “The future must not belong to those who slander the name of the prophet of Islam.” Gaffney said that was the sort of statement you could find on an al-Qaida website.
Gaffney then predicted, if the current Democratic efforts to change the First Amendment were successful, they wouldn’t just limit free speech, they would also make insults to Islam against the law.
Retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Thomas G. McInerney said there was one very big difference between Benghazi and Watergate: President Nixon’s scandal was limited to the White House. The general said the Benghazi cover-up cuts across the entire executive branch, including the State Department, FBI, Justice Department, National Security Council, CIA and elements of the military.
However, he added, he knew of members of special operations forces, forced by the administration to sign nondisclosure agreements, who were just aching to be subpoenaed by the Gowdy committee so they could tell lawmakers what they know.
Gowdy has famously asked the media: If all the Benghazi questions have been answered, could any of them say why U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens, who was killed by terrorists, was in the obscure diplomatic compound that night?
McInerney said his understanding was Stevens was helping facilitate a covert gun-running scheme, with the U.S. government supplying arms from Libya to rebels in Syria, via Turkey.
He believes the 30 CIA agents on the ground in Benghazi during the time of the attack, as well as special operations and State Department personnel, were sworn to secrecy, but the logjam of information will break once they are subpoenaed.
He predicts the truth will come out, and when it does the American people will be outraged that they were lied to.
Former U.S. Attorney Joe diGenova said another reason the truth hasn’t come out is because the nation has an incurious media that operate as “flacks” for the administration.
Nearly all the panelists expressed dismay and outrage that the administration did nothing to save the lives of the four Americans who died during the attack on the compound on the night of Sept. 11, 2012.
DiGenova said the problem is no one would stand up to the president and tell him to send help.
His voice rising with indignation, diGenova declared, “Everybody knew what was going on that night. The question was who had b-lls that night? A lot of people didn’t have the b-lls and didn’t do their jobs.”
His voice rising to a crescendo, the attorney scornfully declared, “These people actually went home and went to bed, and people died.” The remark elected an emotional round of applause from the 200 people gathered at the Washington, D.C., hall to watch the panel.
Read more at WND
Here is the entire event:
The Blaze, By Erica Ritz:
Author and terrorism expert Brigitte Gabriel, the CEO of ACT! for America, spoke heatedly at the Heritage Foundation’s Benghazi panel on Monday after being asked a question by a Muslim law student from American University. Gabriel’s response made the audience erupt in cheers, with some even jumping to their feet. But that’s not the end of it: the student herself even elicited applause at the end.
“I know that we portray Islam and all Muslims as bad, but there are 1.8 billion [followers] of Islam,” the law student, who identified herself as Saba Ahmed, began. “We have 8 million plus Muslim Americans in this country, and I don’t see them represented here. But my question is: how can we fight an ideological war with weapons? How can we ever end this war? The jihadist ideology that you talk about, it’s an ideology. How can you ever win this thing if you don’t address it ideologically?”
After a response from Frank Gaffney, Gabriel began by thanking Ahmed for the question. Then she launched into a heated explanation of why radical Islam matters, even if the majority of Muslims are peaceful.
“There are 1.2 billion Muslims in the world today – of course not all of them are radicals!” Gabriel said. “The majority of them are peaceful people. The radicals are estimated to be between 15 to 25 percent. … But when you look at 15 to 25 percent of the world Muslim population, you’re looking at 180 million to 300 million people dedicated to the destruction of western civilization. That is as big as the United States. So why should we worry about the radical 15 to 25 percent? Because it is the radicals that kill. Because it is the radicals that behead and massacre.”
Gabriel continued to note that the majority of Germans, Russians, Chinese, and Japanese in the 20th century were peaceful people, but the radicals in charge massacred tens of millions of people.
“The peaceful majority were irrelevant,” Gabriel said repeatedly.
“I’m glad you’re here, but where are the others speaking out?” Gabriel asked, before being drowned out by a round of applause. “As an American citizen, you sat in this room and instead of standing up and [asking] something about our four Americans that died [in Benghazi] and what our government is doing to correct the problem, you stood there to make a point about peaceful, moderate Muslims.”
Ahmed did not seem defensive or angry over Gabriel’s response, kindly responding that “as a peaceful American Muslim,” she would like to think that she is not “irrelevant.”
“I’m just as much an American, and I’m very deeply saddened about the lives that were lost in Libya, and I hope that we will find justice for their families,” Ahmed continued. “But I don’t think that this war can ever be won by just the military. You have to bring Muslims to the table to address this.”
The panelists all agreed that the dilemma cannot be solved by the military alone, before one asked Ahmed: “Can you tell me who the head of the Muslim peace movement is?”
The law student laughed and said: “I guess it’s me right now. Thank you.”
That’s when the panel and the audience cheered her.
The exchange has caused some controversy on the web, with Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank describing it as “ugly taunting of a woman in the room who wore an Islamic head covering.” Media Matters also picked up the story, and posted video of Gabriel’s response via the Heritage Foundation’s livestream.
Watch the video below to make your own decision about whether it was an “ugly” exchange (relevant comments start around 4:15):