GABRIEL: ISIS is a threat beyond Iraq, with Shariah as worldwide aim

A member of an Iraqi volunteer forces group joins training near the Imam Ali shrine in the southern holy Shiite city of Najaf, Iraq, Thursday, June 26, 2014, after authorities urged Iraqis to help battle insurgents. Shiite militias responding to a call to arms by Iraq’s top cleric are focused on protecting the capital and Shiite shrines. (AP Photo/Jaber al-Helo)

A member of an Iraqi volunteer forces group joins training near the Imam Ali shrine in the southern holy Shiite city of Najaf, Iraq, Thursday, June 26, 2014, after authorities urged Iraqis to help battle insurgents. Shiite militias responding to a call to arms by Iraq’s top cleric are focused on protecting the capital and Shiite shrines. (AP Photo/Jaber al-Helo)

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.

ISIS isn’t acting out of anger over borders or “politics” as the West understands the term. ISIS has a specific goal in mind and that is the formation of an Islamic state ruled by Shariah.

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.

Terror Expert Accuses CNN of ‘Biasly’ Editing Her Contentious Segment About Muslim Extremism

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.”

BG

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

Brigitte Gabriel and Zuhdi Jasser disagree on the idea of instilling Jeffersonian Democratic Ideals in the Middle East

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?

 

 

A ‘Moderate Muslim’ at the Heritage Foundation?

By Andrew Harrod:

“Who is the head of the Muslim peace movement,” journalist Chris Plante asked of my Facebook friend Saba Ahmed at a recent, nationally notorious exchange at a Heritage Foundation panel.

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.

American University law student Saba Ahmed spoke at the Heritage Foundation’s panel on Benghazi June 16, 2014. (Photo: The Heritage Foundation via Media Matters)

American University law student Saba Ahmed spoke at the Heritage Foundation’s panel on Benghazi June 16, 2014. (Photo: The Heritage Foundation via Media Matters)

“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.

Sean Hannity interviewed Saba Ahmed on his Fox News show earlier this week. Photo Credit: Fox News

Sean Hannity interviewed Saba Ahmed on his Fox News show earlier this week. Photo Credit: Fox News

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

‘You’re Dangerous!’: Sparks Fly Between ‘Hannity’ Panel on Radical Islam

Fox News Insider:

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. 

 

Washington Post Engages in Propaganda Exercise against Benghazi Conference

timthumb (7)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.’

Saba-AhmedObviously… Gabriel saw right through her act and confronted her. “Are you an American?” she asked, and told her that her “political correctness” belongs “in the garbage.”

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.

Even Politico’s Dylan Byers and CNN’s Jake Tapper are calling foul:

Dylan Byers tweet

Tapper tweet

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

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

 

Obama ‘went to bed while people died’

benghazi_fire_gunBy GARTH KANT:

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:

Benghazi Panelist’s Fiery Response to a Muslim Student’s Question That Made the Audience Erupt in Cheers

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?”

American University law student Saba Ahmed spoke at the Heritage Foundation's panel on Benghazi June 16, 2014. (Photo: The Heritage Foundation via Media Matters)

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):

On Hannity Show Brigitte Gabriel and Ali Sina Agree that ISLAM is the problem

A discussion of Boko Haram led to an examination of the ideology that motivates them. Ali Sina explained that he left Islam when he read the Quran and realized how evil it was. He went on to say that most Muslims have not read the Quran and moderate Muslims such as Zuhdi Jasser are not telling the truth about Islam.

BrigitteBrigitte Gabriel explained that it is Islamic ideology which subjugates women and persecutes Christians that is motivating Boko Haram. She said she goes into Arabic chat rooms online and sees them laughing at us and our twitter hashtag campaign, #BringBackOurGirls.

Ali Sina asserted that political correctness is what prevents us from admitting that the problem is Islam…not radical Islam or Wahhabi Islam or extreme islam…just ISLAM and the example of Mohammed.

When asked if she agreed, Brigitte cited a 2006 Pentagon study that came to the conclusion that Islam was the problem but the media avoided it as if it was” nuclear and harmful to your health” She then asserted that it is the ideology “coming straight from the mouth of Mohammed” that is driving Boko Haram and radicals always win in debates with moderates because they quote doctrine supporting their case. She went on to say that In the Arabic world it is an insult to say “moderate Islam” or “radical Islam”…there is only one Islam. “Moderate Islam is an American verbiage” that we came up because we could not believe that this was coming out of a religion.

This is a departure from Brigitte’s long time use of the term ‘Radical Islam” in her writings and lectures.

Listen to the podcast here:

http://www.iheart.com/talk/show/24392822/?episode_id=26883064

Click on this one:

Tue, May 20th, 2014 Hour 3

May 20, 2014 | 32 min

Air Force Vet Anthony Coleman discusses the poor treatment he received from the VA Hospital in AZ; Brigitte Gabriel and Ali Sina discuss the terrorist group Boko Haram

****

Zuhdi Jasser, seems to negate as historically unreliable anything negative about Mohammed and still professes him to be “the best example for man”. Is this a heartfelt conviction or a political calculation? If you want to know more about Zuhdi Jasser, a very insightful article was written by Andrew Harrod when he reviewed Jasser’s book, “A Battle for the Soul of Islam”.

Watch this 2011 debate between Spencer and Jasser moderated by Andrew McCarthy:

 

Ali Sina actually had an interesting twitter conversation with Zuhdi Jasser recently which he wrote about. Jasser defends his version of Islam with whether it is politically expedient not whether it is true. He seems to be promoting “Jeffersonian Liberty” not Islam.

Dr. Zuhdi Jasser: The Deception of Moderate Islam by Ali Sina May 9, 2014

Zuhdi-Jasser1-300x223These days the discussion everywhere is about the 200 schoolgirls kidnapped in Nigeria and offered for sale by the Muslim terrorist group Boko Haram. And guess who the media is turning to for answers! The self-proclaimed “moderate Muslim” Dr. Zuhdi Jasser! He will tell the Americans that slavery has nothing to do with Islam and terrorism is un-Islamic.

He sent a tweet announcing that he had been invited by Fox News for an interview. I sent him a tweet, congratulating him for having another chance to bamboozle the American public. Here is our mini debate on twitter.

Dr. Jasser is under the delusion that if he shows Muslims the superiority of American constitution they will abandon the Quran. Nothing can be further from the truth. Muslims follow the Quran not because it is good, ethical or even logical, but because they think it is the unaltered word of God. That is the end of discussion. If Dr. Jasser really knows Islam and Muslim he should know that for them the Quran is the ultimate authority. It is ridiculous to expect them to turn their back to Allah and his messenger and follow a non-Muslim American president. Is he really this deluded or is he deceiving his audience? But let us see the rest of our tweets.

Dr. Jasser’s says by highlighting the evil teaching of the Quran I am radicalizing Muslims. So for 1400 years Muslims lived peacefully, like angels, until I began pointing out the hate and the violence in the Quran. It is then that they became radicalized.

This is really what he thinks. I heard this argument numerous times. This is the typical Muslim thinking. They blame their victim for their violence. By virtue of following a narcissist, Muslims share his psychosis and reason like their prophet.

I tried to show the fallacy of his argument with the following question.

There you have it. One he saw he can’t defend his absurd argument he ended the discussion. Of course Islam is violent. Of course the Boko Haram is not doing anything that Muhammad did not do. Muhammad made immense fortunes by enslaving women and children and selling them or ransoming them in exchange with money.

The truth is that Zuhdi Jasser and his Canadian counterpart, Tarek Fatah, a closet Ahamdi not even recognized as a Muslim, have no effect on Muslims. Not only are they not converting the radicals to moderates, they will most likely be killed just like any apostate, if they go to a real Islamic country.

Muslims don’t care how others interpret the Quran. They are not illiterate. They can read for themselves. Those who read the Quran and Tafseer know that the so called radicals have the correct understanding of the Quran. The solution to end the Islamic violence is not to lie more and claim Muhammad was a man of peace. The solution is to tell them the truth and show them that the Al Qaida, the Wahhabis and the mullahs of Iran are the real Muslims. The differences between them are superficial. They perfectly understand the spirit and the essence of Islam and follow the examples of Muhammad. It is my belief as well as experience that most Muslims, once see the ugly truth, will leave Islam.

That is how we can put an end to Islamic violence, with truth, not with more lies. But truth is ugly, so most people prefer lies. But lies are only a mask covering the truth. That is why Zuhdi Jasser and Tark Fatah get invited by the Media and ex-Muslims are ignored.

This reminds me of a joke. A man lost his keys in the dark, unable to see anything, he went farther away searching they under the light. When his friend said, but you lost them over there, he replied, “here I can see better”. Our politicians and the media love to interview the “moderate Muslims” even though they have no answers because those who have the answer say things that are not pleasant to hear.

Needless to say that Dr. Jasser’s reasoning that Muslims can’t handle the truth and will become radicalized if they hear is is an insult to Muslims. He basically saying Muslims are stupid, incapable of accepting the truth. Muslims become offended and throw tantrum when their religion is slighted. The solution is not to lie more. They don’t need anyone to patronize them.

Many Muslims are leaving Islam silently. I have received thousands of emails personally. We need to intensify our efforts and spread the truth to everyone. A well written, well documented and well produced movie can bring that change.

Truth is often bitter, that is why people resort to sweet lies. But lies kill us, and truth will set us free

Attempting to Rewrite the History of September 11th

september-9-11-attacks-anniversary-ground-zero-world-trade-center-pentagon-flight-93-second-airplane-wtc_39997_600x450ACT! for America, By Brigitte Gabriel:

On May 21st, more than 13 years after the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001, the National September 11 Memorial Museum will open its doors to the public to make certain that Americans will never forget what happened that day.

Unfortunately, some are working to ensure that future generations of Americans never fully understand the attacks, which were the most deadly terrorist attacks in the history of the United States.

One of the exhibits in the museum will feature a 7-minute film called “The Rise of Al Qaeda.”

In that film, the Al Qaeda terrorists are referred to as “Islamists” who were waging “jihad” with the attacks upon America.

Those two words, “Islamists” and “Jihad” have caused a controversy, with a variety of critics calling for whitewashing the description of Al Qaeda and the attacks by sanitizing the museum commentary by removing those two words.

This would be a tragic mistake.

Despite the complaints, the use of the terms “Islamist” and “jihad” in no way suggest that all Muslims are terrorists or support violence. No serious analyst in his or her right mind would make such an assertion.

Nevertheless, in warfare the enemy’s reality becomes your reality, so it makes perfect sense to call Islamists “Islamists” and to call Jihad “Jihad.” After all, in World War II, Nazis were referred to as Nazis, because they themselves referred to themselves as such.

America’s enemies in the war on terror do NOT refer to themselves as “extremists,” “militants,” or “radicals.”

They refer to themselves as Jihadists and Jihadis.

Interestingly, critics on both sides of the issue seem to dislike the term “Islamist.” Apologists for organizations such as Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood claim that the term too closely identifies Islam with “extremism.” Many in the countershariah and counterjihad movement say that the term “Islamist” is a term concocted in the West that has no meaning in the Islamic world.

Both are wrong.

The first known use of the term “Islamist” came from the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the late dictator of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the world’s foremost state sponsor of terrorism.

Khomeini said: “We are neither capitalists nor communists. We are Islamists.”

There are many different definitions listed for the term “Islamist,” but that is not the point. The point is that one of the world’s most prominent Muslim leaders coined the term to describe the revolution he led. It is entirely proper for the 9/11 museum to use the term “Islamists” to describe Al Qaeda.

The same is true for the term “jihad.” There has long been a debate about the use of the term jihad, with Muslim Brotherhood organizations such as CAIR particularly objecting to its use to describe violent warfare or terrorism.

The Muslim Brotherhood in America aims to convince Americans that Jihad only means “to struggle” or, more specifically, an internal, personal struggle.

This is only partially correct and any campaign that claims that the term Jihad only means an internal, personal struggle amounts to disinformation. The dualistic nature of Islam, in this case as it applies to the meaning of “Jihad,” is well documented both in historical Islamic doctrine and in contemporary use of the term.

And Jihad definitely does not only mean an internal, personal struggle. In fact, the most widespread meaning of the term that is of particular interest to Westerners who are threatened by Jihad does in fact entail violence.

A false and misleading statement has been attributed to the San Francisco chapter head of CAIR, Zahra Billoo:

“A common misconception of the word jihad is that it means armed struggle or holy war, and that is something that has been perpetrated by many who’ve made careers out of pushing anti-Muslim sentiment.”

Such a meaning for Jihad has nothing to do with anyone with an “anti-Muslim sentiment.” It has everything to do with Islam itself.

Let us examine definitions of Jihad from two authoritative sources.

Jihad According to the Quran

The first is the Quran itself. In this case, specifically The Noble Qu’ran, translated into English by two scholars: Dr. Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din Al-Hilali, PhD, professor of Islamic Faith and Teachings at the Islamic University, Al-Madinah Al-Munawwarah, Saudi Arabia and Dr. Muhammad Mushin Khan of the same institution. The Noble Qu’ran was published by Darussalam Publishers and Distributors, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. It has been catalogued by King Fahad National Library. On page 818, in a glossary accompanying the text of the Quran, The Noble Qu’ran provides the following definition of Jihad:

“Jihad: Holy fighting in the Cause of Allah or any other kind of effort to make Allah’s Word superior. Jihad is regarded as one of the fundamentals of Islam.”


Can the Quran itself be promoting “anti-Muslim sentiment” as CAIR’s Zahra Billoo asserts?

Jihad According to Shariah

Our second source is Reliance of the Traveler: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law.

Reliance of the Traveler is one of the world’s most widely read manuals of Shariah law. It has been endorsed by a variety of Islamic authorities, including Al Azhar University in Cairo, IIIT (International Institute of Islamic Thought) in Herndon, Virginia, the Fiqh Council of North America, the Islamic Fiqh Academy in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, the Mufti of the Jordanian Armed Forces and the Imam of the Mosque of Darwish Pasha in Damascus, Syria.

These can hardly be termed as those pushing “anti-Muslim sentiment” as Billoo claims.

On page 599 of Reliance of the Traveler, readers can find the following passage:

o9.0 JIHAD

(O: Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion…

The scriptural basis for jihad, prior to scholarly consensus is such Koranic verses as:

(1) “Fighting is prescribed for you” (Koran 2:216);
(2) “Slay them wherever you find them” (Koran 4:89);
(3) “Fight the idolators utterly” (Koran 9:36);

and such hadiths as the one related by Bukhari and Muslim that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said:

“I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and perform the prayer, and pay zakat. If they say it, they have saved their blood and possessions from me, except for the rights of Islam over them. And their final reckoning is with Allah”;

and the hadith reported by Muslim,

“To go forth in the morning or evening to fight in the path of Allah is better than the whole world and everything in it.”


Jihad According to Terrorists

If Jihad truly means to “struggle” and not warfare to establish the religion, how does CAIR explain the names of all these terrorist organizations?

Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami (Pakistan, Bangladesh, India)
Islamic Front for Armed Jihad (Algeria)
Islamic Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine (Lebanon)
Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine (Israel)
Islamic Jihad Organization (Lebanon)
Islamic Jihad Union (Uzbekistan)
Jama’at al-Jihad al-Islami (Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Russia)
Laskar Jihad (Indonesia)
United Jihad Council (India)

So, it is completely appropriate for the 9/11 museum to use the term “jihadist” and “jihad” to describe Al Qaeda terrorists and their activity.

Conclusion

We suspect that the sensitivity expressed with regard to the 9/11 museum goes way beyond the use of the terms “Islamist” and “jihad.”

The fact is, our country has never truly come to terms with the role that Islam plays in Jihadist terrorism.

It would be great if there was truly no connection whatsoever between Islam and Jihad. But the reality is Jihad is a tenet of Islam.

As previously stated, in warfare the enemy’s reality becomes your reality. It makes no difference what Americans think about the stated motivations and doctrine behind the actions of Al Qaeda. The only thing that truly matters is what the leaders and members of Al Qaeda think about why they wage warfare.

The fact of the matter is, Al Qaeda justify their actions by invoking Islam and Allah:

In the name of Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate,

The General Command of the al-Qaeda Organization Statement on the Succession of Sheikh Osama Bin Laden in the al-Qaeda Organization’s Command

With hearts that are satisfied with Allah’s ordainment, and assured of Almighty Allah’s promise and His good reward, the Islamic umma, the mujahideen in the al-Qaeda Organization, and in other groups received the news of the martyrdom of the reviver imam, the jihadist immigrant Sheikh Osama Bin-Muhammad Bin Laden, may Allah rest his soul in peace. We pray to the Almighty Allah to raise his rank and to reward him, on behalf of us and the Muslim umma, with the best of rewards.

Since jihad is continuing until the Day of Resurrection … the General Command of the al-Qaeda Organization announces, after completion of consultations, that Sheikh Dr Abu-Muhammad Ayman al-Zawahiri, may Allah guide him to success, has taken over command of the group…

Statement from Al Qaeda
Announcing Zawahiri as the
New leader of Al Qaeda after
Osama Bin Laden’s death


All these sins and crimes committed by the Americans are a clear declaration of war on Allah, his messenger and Muslims.

The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies – civilians and military – is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in every country in which it is possible to do it…

We, with Allah’s help, call on every Muslim who believes in Allah and wishes to be rewarded to comply with Allah’s order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it.

Ayman al-Zawahiri
Leader of Al Qaeda


It would be a tragic mistake if the 9/11 museum was to erase the role that their Islamic faith played in the leadership and membership of Al Qaeda’s horrific actions on September 11th, 2001. 

URGENT ACTION ALERT! Why Did the VA Legislature Publicly Commend a 9/11 Terror Mosque?

state-capitol-cover-jan-14-20136What is going on in the Virginia state legislature? by By Brigitte Gabriel

Something is terribly wrong with the Virginia state legislature.

On Wednesday, March 5th, in House Joint Resolution 484, the elected representatives of the people of Virginia commended the notorious, terror-tied Dar al Hijrah Islamic Center in Falls Church.

Dar al Hijrah has a history of ties to multiple known and convicted terrorists, led by its former Imam, Anwar al-Awlaki, who became head of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, before he was killed in a US air strike in 2011.

It was this institution that the Virginia House and Senate agreed to commend by voice vote.

This amounts to an official government endorsement of an entity whose members and employees have been tied to Jihad for many years.

In addition to the fact that an Imam at Dar al Hijrah mosque from 2001-2002 was Anwar al-Awlaki, not just an Al Qaeda terrorist, but the leader of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, the mosque has a macabre history and other Imams that have preached there have expressed violent extremist views as recently as 2013:

Other Imams at Dar al-Hijrah have expressed extremist views as well:

• Imam Sheik Shaker Elsayed of Dar al-Hijrah called for armed jihad in a speech at a high school in Alexandria, Virginia in February 2013.

Dar al-Hijrah is affiliated with three Muslim Brotherhood front groups (The Muslim Brotherhood has been designated a terrorist organization by Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.) in the United States:

• The Muslim American Society

• The Islamic Society of North America

• The North American Islamic Trust

All three of these organizations were named as unindicted co-conspirators in the largest successful terrorism financing prosecution in US history: the US v the Holy Land Foundation.

This hardly seems like the type of organization that any governmental body in the United States—on any level—should be praising.

The members of the Virginia legislature—especially the leadership in both the House and Senate—should be ashamed. They should move right away to rescind the unjustified honor that they bestowed on Dar al-Hijrah and replace it with a resolution condemning the mosque’s numerous ties to terrorists and extremists.

*** TIME-SENSITIVE VIRGINIA ACTION ALERT! ***
EXPRESS YOUR OPPOSITION TO THE VIRGINIA
GENERAL ASSEMBLY’S COMMENDATION
OF A 9/11 MOSQUE!
by Lisa Piraneo, Director of Government Relations

ACT! for America

As you may know, the Leadership of the Virginia General Assembly recently allowed a resolution to come to the floors of the House and Senate (via voice vote, no less) that commends the Falls Church, Dar Al-Hijrah Islamic Center – an organization that has a long history of ties to multiple known and convicted terrorists – including the perpetrators of 9/11.

Using your tax dollars, the Leadership in both the Virginia House and Senate agreed to allow H.J. Res. 484, to come to the floor for a vote….and they allowed it to be passed by “voice vote” so there is no trace of how each legislator acted on the matter. This one rests squarely on Leadership’s shoulders. Shame on them.

Silence by the voters of Virginia will send a clear message that outrageous acts like this are O.K. Loud and vocal opposition, however, will send quite another message: This is unacceptable.

Next week, the Virginia General Assembly will return to session for a very brief period of time to address some still-pending budget matters.

This is the time for the General Assembly Leadership – who allowed this resolution to come to the floor for a vote via voice vote – to hear how their constituency feels about this matter – and to understand that the Virginia voters expect this wrong to be corrected.

*** IMPORTANT AND TIME-SENSITIVE ACTION ITEM! ***

It will only take one minute for you to individually express your opposition about H.J. Res. 484 by signing our Open Letter to the Leadership of the Virginia General Assembly, but when all of our voices are joined together, it will create an enormous roar. That’s what they need to hear.

Will you please read and sign our letter today?

UPDATE: 

We have written a sample call and e-mail script for you, to make this as easy as possible.

Click HERE TO CALL and click HERE TO E-MAIL.

Then, please pass it along to everyone you know who thinks that no legislative body should publicly endorse and commend institutions with ties to terrorists.

Thank you!

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

Also see:

Virginia Honors 9/11 Mosque (investors.com) -

Political Correctness: The only thing more revolting than building a mosque next to the World Trade Center would be honoring the mosque that helped the 9/11 hijackers. Yet that’s just what Virginia has done.

Another Day, Another Jihad Plot in America

ACT! For America, By Brigitte Gabriel:

Something scary happened on Friday the 13th, but you’d hardly have noticed from the news reports.

The Joint Terrorism Task Force in Wichita, Kansas, arrested a 58-year old airport employee in a plot to carry out a suicide bombing at the city’s Mid-Continent Airport.

download (42)The man, Terry Lee Loewen, was a white convert to Islam who authorities say became “radicalized” over the Internet.

Loewen planned to drive a vehicle laden with explosives onto the airport and explode it—and himself—at the terminal where hundreds of unsuspecting travelers went about their normal business.

Luckily, the FBI had intercepted Loewen and his vehicle contained only dummy explosives planted by an FBI agent that Loewen believed to be a collaborator.

This plot received a great deal of exposure on the Drudge Report, but none of the major news agencies thought it worthy of an email news bulletin—except for Fox News.

A plot like this would have stopped the presses just 15 years ago. Today, it’s just another news story on a busy news day. In another week or so, very few people outside of Kansas will even remember Terry Lee Loewen’s name, or that he was arrested for attempting to carry out mass murder in the name of Jihad. America is becoming desensitized to jihadi terrorism and that is unfortunate. Islamic Jihad is becoming a customary part of our everyday lives.

What is frightening about the homegrown terrorism that we’ve been seeing the last few years is that those terrorists—or would be suicide bombers—seem to be normal Americans.

Loewen lived in a quiet, middle class, suburban neighborhood in a modest, one-story ranch-style home. In the local newspaper The Wichita Eagle, his neighbors described him as “normal:”

Constance Reed and her daughter, Kyia, lived down the street from Loewen on the 3900 block of East Funston in southeast Wichita.

“I can’t believe it,” said her daughter, Kyia. “We just went trick or treating down there a month or so ago. It’s a normal house, normal decorations. We saw him and his wife; both normal people.”

Americans need to understand that this is the pattern—not the exception—when it comes to the homegrown Jihadist terrorists. They don’t stand out—by design. In my first book Because They Hate, I discuss watching a news interview of Mohammad Atta’s landlord. Atta as you recall was the 9/11 terrorist attack’s ringleader. To hear the landlord describe Atta and his roommates and guests, you’d have though Atta and his roommates were Boy Scouts. The landlord got that impression because Atta cultivated that image; he knew how to blend in with suburban America and he made a deliberate effort to do so.

Mohammad Atta wasn’t the only one.

• Faisal Shahzad, the Jihadist terrorist who attempted to set off a bomb in Times Square in New York City on May 1st, 2010, lived in suburbia and was often seen walking his neighborhood with his two little girls.

• Najibullah Zazi, who pled guilty in a plot to bomb the New York City subway system, lived a quiet life in Flushing, New York , attended Flushing High School and, for 5 years, operated a coffee and pastry cart on Wall Street, complete with a “God Bless America” sign on display.

• Nineteen-year old Hosam Smadi, who was convicted in a plot to blow up a Dallas skyscraper in 2009, was described by many that knew him as “one of the nicest men they had ever met.” The NBC affiliate in Dallas/Fort Worth described him in a story: “He was a mixture between wannabe gangster and wannabe rock star”… “Everybody loved Sam. He liked to hang out and have fun.” Part of the fun Smadi had in mind was committing mass murder in the name of Jihad.

And I can go on and on…

Jihadist terrorists are all too often your normal next-door neighbor. They are not abnormal looking and typically do not stand out. It takes a well-informed person about the ideology of Jihad to spot the changes of behavior and ask the right questions. The problem we are facing as a society is that we have the blind leading the blind. This willful blindness is coming from the top down. From the office of the president who has purged all terms of Islamic Jihad, Jihadism, Islamic terrorism out of our national language lest we offend Muslims.

Case in point was the Boston bombing. The Russian intelligence turned in a recorded phone conversation between Tamerlan Tsarnaev and his mother discussing Jihad to the FBI to alert them to the coming threat. The FBI didn’t understand the seriousness of that conversation because, since the purge by President Obama in 2009, the FBI is taught that Jihad is basically Islamic Yoga to better yourself.

We as Americans must come to grips with the fact that we now have an enemy that is living and working amongst us. We must become educated as to their ideology and doctrine and accept the fact that they hate us because of that doctrine and ideology. It’s not a pleasant thought, but whether we want to admit it or not, those are the facts and it is their reality. As a result, it has now become our reality too. It is also our national duty as American citizens to identify the threat, create an open national dialogue about the ideology of Jihad and do whatever we can to protect our citizens against it. Anything less than that would be a betrayal to all the great American leaders who came before us and gave their all to create the greatest, most powerful nation on the face of the planet.

Empowering our law enforcement professionals: Announcing “The Thin Blue Line Project”

 

A Special Message from
Brigitte Gabriel, President


I’ve been eagerly anticipating today, the day I could send you this email.

Because today, it’s my great pleasure to announce the launch of a project we’ve been working on for over a year – one that could change the course of anti-terrorism strategies and tactics!

We call it “ACT! for America Education’s Thin Blue Line Project.”

The “thin blue line” is a reference to the line of law enforcement officers that stands between the law-abiding and the law-breaking.

Unfortunately, thanks to suffocating political correctness in our country, most law enforcement professionals aren’t getting the information, materials and training they need to effectively understand and fight Islamist terrorism.

This is why we’re launching “The Thin Blue Line Project,” a one-of-a-kind project designed by law enforcement for law enforcement (please see the video introduction at the bottom).

CHECK OUT THE HOME PAGE HERE!

(Note: Access to the entire site is for active or
retired law enforcement, by registration only).

Here’s what part of the home page looks like:

This password-access only website for law enforcement professionals gives them all the information they’re not now getting from the politically correct higher-ups in DHS and the FBI.

  • Who and what is the Muslim Brotherhood?
  • What is the Muslim Brotherhood plan for America, and why is knowing this important?
  • What is jihad and how does this relate to terrorism?
  • What kinds of covert and disinformation campaigns are being used by Muslim Brotherhood front organizations to advance sharia law and jihad?
  • How are law enforcement “outreach” programs frequently used by Muslim Brotherhood operatives and their allies to co-opt law enforcement officers – especially the leaders?
  • What is the role that local and state law enforcement can play in preventing terrorism?
  • Who and where are the radical individuals and organizations in America?
  • What are the best tactics and techniques for law enforcement to use in discovering, preventing and prosecuting terrorist activity?
  • And much, much more!
Here’s a shot of the radicalization locator map:

I guarantee you – this project is NOT politically correct!!!

Had FBI agents understood the role that jihad plays in terrorism, maybe they would have stopped Tamerlan Tsarnaev before he blew up the Boston Marathon.

Here’s what an FBI special agent said about “The Thin Blue Line Project.”

Since the FBI has decided to eliminate evidence/fact-based training on the threat to America from the Global Islamic Movement and Jihad, and replace it with more politically sensitive training which neither addresses the threat nor gives agents and officers the ability to pursue those threats, The Thin Blue Line Project should be the go-to place for everyone in law enforcement and all those with national security duties.


So I encourage you, get the word out to everyone you know – especially those in law enforcement. If you’re not in law enforcement, you can check out the home page here, and you can encourage law enforcement professionals to sign up for access to the site.

If you are or have been in law enforcement, please register today!

Because what you’ll learn on this site will make America – and your community – safer from the threat of radical Islam.

Steven Emerson and Brigitte Gabriel Interviewed on Rise of al-Shabab & Mall Terror Attack

In profile: The Somali terror group Al Shabaab, which has claimed responsibility for the attack. (Daily Mail)

In profile: The Somali terror group Al Shabaab, which has claimed responsibility for the attack. (Daily Mail)

 

 

From IPT:

SEAN HANNITY: And welcome back to HANNITY. The intense standoff between Somali terrorists and Kenyan security forces continued for the third straight day today at the Westgate shopping mall in Nairobi, Kenya. Now, the horrific terrorist attack began Saturday when an estimate of 10 to 15 members of an al-Qaeda linked group Al-Shabaab entered the mall and open fire and set off grenades, killing at least 62 people, injuring close to 200 more. Now the terrorist moved through the mall asking shoppers whether they were Muslim or not, freeing only those that could prove they were in fact Muslim.

According to officials, Kenyan security forces are currently in control of all floors of the mall after gunfire from inside the heavy smoke from a fire that was seen filling the air all throughout the day today. At this hour, officials believe all the hostages have in fact been released.

Here with reaction, from ACT! for America Brigitte Gabriel and terrorism expert Steve Emerson. Let me talk about the al-Qaeda Somalia affiliate al Shabaab. What do you know about them, Brigitte?

BRIGITTE GABRIEL: Well, Al Shabaab is linked to al- Qaeda and have been working with al-Qaeda. Actually, al-Qaeda has trained and provided training facilities for communication between al-Qaeda and the Arabian Peninsula and the al-Qaeda central. We know that a lot of the al- Shabaab went and fought with al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and Yemen in particular. We know that they are very trained and very sophisticated. They comprise about 7,000 to 9,000 members and they are recruiting actively in the United States from the Somali communities in the United States.

HANNITY: Steve, what can you add for that?

STEVE EMERSON: Well, the Washington Post reported tonight, well I usually don’t quote the post, but they quoted the Kenyan foreign minister as saying that several of the attackers spoke English. Now, what that indicates together with U.S. intelligence which has known that, in al- Shabaab, there are upwards of a hundred Europeans and Americans fighting for al Shabaab. They have become the new al Qaeda central. No longer is Afghanistan the center of gravity or Yemen the center of gravity. This is a seminal act, Sean, this will propel them into becoming the new al Qaeda franchise around the world, I fear because of the fact it’s so internationalized right now.

HANNITY: So, for example, when we talk about the incidents that were missed in terms of us recognizing the war with al-Qaeda and the war on terrorism. We talked about the embassy bombings in Kenya, Tanzania, the first trade center bombing, the USS Cole. Now, we may refer to this as the rise of al Shabaab.

EMERSON: This could the seminal incident that propels them into becoming the new face of al-Qaeda. Because one, in a perverse way, the success of this, mass hysteria, publicity, the mass killings, the fact that they took their time in actually doing surveillance like the Mumbai massacre several years ago will recruit new members. Number two, they already have Americans with American passports.

HANNITY: How did they get these Americans? Let me throw that to Brigitte. Brigitte, how did they recruit these Americans?

GABRIEL: Well, they are recruiting them from the Somali communities here in the United States. We have a huge Somali community, for example, in different parts. Actually, part of the bombers who were involved in this Kenya attack are from six American communities, from Arizona, from Maine, from Illinois, from Kansas, from Minnesota.

So what they are doing is they are recruiting from them. One of the most notorious, one of the leaders actually of al Shabaab was Omar Hammami from Alabama. He was recruited at the University of Alabama. He was actually the president of the Muslim Student Association.

HANNITY: Let me ask both of you, and I will start with Steve first. I contend — we look back 30 years from now and we’re going to refer to this time in history as the rise of the radical Islamist. I mean, by Egypt, obviously what’s happening with Syria, Iran and now this is all spreading into Africa, North Africa in particular. So my question to you is, is that in fact what we are dealing with — the rise of radical Islamists and that this now is the single greatest threat in terms of a radical ideology the world faces?

EMERSON: I agree with you 100 percent. In fact what we have seen in the past, Sean, in the past decade or the past decade and a half was al Qaeda’s rise. But now we are seeing basically a proliferation of smaller movements that are tethered to al Qaeda’s ideology but are a subset of radical Islam. So the Jihadists in Syria, the Jihadists in Chechnya, the Jihadists that are in the United States, all the lone wolves, the 70 plots since 9/11.

HANNITY: And in Europe.

EMERSON: In Europe every single day — it’s not in the American press. Every single day there are arrests. Just yesterday they arrested five Jihadists in London. Every single day there are arrests throughout Europe because of the amount of Jihadists that basically immigrated to Europe and pledged allegiance not to their host country but to the Jihad. They have European passports, Sean. So they can travel with immunity around the European continent.

HANNITY: Brigitte, doesn’t this fit into the model of this caliphate or desire for a caliphate as they ask people questions about the Koran, about Islam and if they don’t get it right, they kill them. They get it right. They are set free.

GABRIEL: Exactly. That’s exactly what they did in Kenya. They asked people with a gun to their head to recite the Shahada. If they did, obviously they were Muslims and they let them go. Those who didn’t, they shot them including young boys. Al Qaeda means the base. It doesn’t matter what different names terrorists go by or different organizations what they share the ideology of al Qaeda and that’s what we are facing worldwide.

HANNITY: All right, thank you both for being with us. Coming up next…

 

CAIR urges school officials to censor Act for America Brigitte Gabriel at Tea Party event

BrigitteGabriel

Brigitte Gabriel, Founder of Act for America

Click here to send your email to school officials in support of Brigitte Gabriel’s First Amendment Rights.

Florida Family Association:

The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) called on school officials on July 24, 2013 to censor Act for America founder, Brigitte Gabriel, at a Tea Party event planned in Minnesota.  The following is some of the text from the CAIR announcement:

(MINNEAPOLIS, MN, 7/24/13) — The Minnesota chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-MN) today called on Independent School District #482 and Little Falls Community High School to consider the negative impact a scheduled speech by an anti-Muslim speaker will have on district students and to rescind approval to hold the event in a school facility.

On July 29, 2013, the Central Minnesota Tea Party will feature anti-Muslim speaker “Brigitte Gabriel” from the hate group ACT! for America at an event in Little Falls Community High School.  Click here to read CAIR’s announcement.

Most government officials in Minnesota sign a state oath of office to uphold the United States Constitution.  The wording of Minnesota’s oath is:  I do solemnly swear or affirm that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Minnesota, and that I will discharge faithfully the duties of the office of …  www.sos.state.mn.us/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=4966

Brigitte Gabriel has worked tirelessly to educate the public about the threat that Islamists pose to the freedoms Americans enjoy.

Please stand with Brigitte now by sending the email that Florida Family Association has prepared for you to send to officials at the Independent School District #482 and Little Falls Community High School.

To send your email, please click the following link, enter your name and email address then click the “Send Your Message” button. You may also modify the subject or message text if you wish. Please Note if you have a problem with the prepared email:  Internet Explorer 10 is not compatible at this time with our Action Message.  If you are using IE 10 please click the link where prompted to “if you have trouble viewing the message text ..” in order to send your email.  If you want the ability to edit the email content please use Internet Explorer 9, Firefox or Chrome until Microsoft fixes the IE 10 error. 

Please click here to send your email to school officials in support of Brigitte Gabriel’s First Amendment Rights

Contact information:

Stephen Jones
Independent School District #482 Little Falls School District

Mr. Stephen Jones

Superintendent of Schools

1001 Fifth Avenue Southeast

Little Falls, MN 56345

 

Stephen Jones
Little Falls Community High School

Mr. Tim Bjorge

Principle