A noted specialist on Islamic law and ideology from the Center for Security Policy, who has been cited as an expert for the Pentagon, says a coalition of Islamists and Marxists is working to destroy the United States.
The comments come from Stephen Coughlin, a lecturer for leading Department of Defense institutions such as the Naval War College, Marine Corps HQ-Quantico and for the FBI. Coughlin is a retired major in the U.S. Army reserves and was assigned to USCENTCOM, with a military intelligence specialty.
His assignments included the Pentagon’s National Military Joint Intelligence Center, the National Security Council’s Interagency Perception Management Threat Panel and the intelligence staff of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, so he has the credentials required for such assessments.
He recently addressed the Northern Virginia Chapter of ACT! for America, where he quoted terrorist Carlos the Jackal, who said, “Only a coalition of Islamists and Marxists can destroy the United States.” Thus, Coughlin said, “If we’re going to get a grip on this, we have to know their narrative and understand it. We know that when the other side has language that’s locked into doctrine, we need to hold them to it.”
He said, too, that the “lone wolf” jihadists can inflict damage.
Tsarnaev reportedly sent a text message to his mother, Zubeidat Tsarnaev, saying he was “ready to die for Islam.” ABC News Radio reported that his surviving brother and fellow suspect told investigators both “were ready to die.” According to The Christian Post, “Dzhokhar Tsarnaev indicated that his older brother hated America and Christianity, especially for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.”
Al-Qaida is one of the Muslim Brotherhood’s many branches and it preaches that individual Muslims should act as lone jihadists, lone terrorists. Therefore, after the bombings in Boston, after the two Muslim Tsarnaev brothers were named as the primary suspects, Coughlin made an in-depth video on the Muslim Brotherhood’s narrative on this subject.
In it, he says, “A couple years ago, in June 2010, I was asked to brief a couple members of Congress about what this concept of the ‘lone wolf’ was. It’s the first time I brought the fact that what the FBI and DHS call ‘lone wolf’ is actually a formal part of jihad.”
In the video, Coughlin also highlights the cold calculation of al-Qaida’s leaders telling their followers who to murder and where to murder them.
And there are some surprising details. For example, he said al-Qaida urges against killing Jews in their synagogues. Coughlin believes that’s because it’s bad publicity that damages the Muslim Brotherhood’s deceptive “interfaith” dialogues with Christians and Jews.
He quotes an article from the al-Qaida magazine “Inspire,” which says: “The confrontation with America is fundamental, while the confrontation with Europe is secondary, aimed at making Europe lead the alliance by putting pressure on her.”
His presentation follows:
The U.S. government has known of the Muslim Brotherhood’s goal of defeating the U.S. since 2004, when federal investigators raided a terrorist’s home in Virginia and found “An Explanatory Memorandum: On the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America.”
The Southern Poverty Law Center has taken a lead role in the institutional left’s attempt to unilaterally intellectually disarm America on the issue of Islamic terrorism. In the wake of the Boston Marathon bombing, it’s worth looking at how the group has attempted to silence critics of Islamic extremism, often by poisoning the well to discredit any examination of the possible dangers posed by Islamists.
The SPLC was started over forty years ago as a legitimate civil rights organization to combat the violent racist actions of groups like the Ku Klux Klan, but has become part of the vast web of organizations–many funded by George Soros’s Open Society Institute–that work together to smear conservative voices in order to advance a leftist agenda.
One way to think of the institutional left is as a body where different organs perform different functions but all function together to form a whole; your stomach signals your brain that it wants food, so your feet walk you to the fridge, your hand opens the door, and so on. With the institutional left, many different groups work in concert to promote the wider agenda of radicals, such as diminishing America’s security.
The role that the Southern Poverty Law Center plays is to be an “objective” source to brand conservative entities as “hate groups” for the purpose of stopping debate and discussion on important issues. The well-heeled SPLC–with financial reserves of over$200 million–does this through their Hate Watch blog and a quarterly magazine but, more ominously, by also reporting their findings directly to the FBI.
The Southern Poverty Law Center has explicitly targeted people like Atlas Shrugs blogger Pam Geller, author Robert Spencer, 60s radical-turned-conservative David Horowitz, and the Center for Security Policy’s Frank Gaffney. By lumping these authors and speakers in with violent groups like the Aryan Brotherhood or Ku Klux Klan and then reporting them to law enforcement as “hate groups,” the SLPC is trying to create a chilling effect on investigation into what we’ve learned time and again are legitimate dangers.
The Southern Poverty Law Center’s impact is magnified because other institutional left groups pick up on the SPLC’s reports and regurgitate them; these circular references are then used to give the reports legitimacy.
Republican leaders of five House committees with national security jurisdictions have issued today a “progress report” (PDF) on the fruits of their respective efforts to investigate the murderous jihadist attack on U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012. The most important take-away is that, more than seven months after that outrage, these committees still do not know precisely what happened.
More to the point, the report indicates that the five committees intend to continue their investigations. It seems predictable that months spent on more of the same, business-as-usual inquiries will produce more of the same stonewalling by the executive branch, a host of still-unanswered questions and a continuing lack of accountability for the policies that got us into this fiasco in Libya, for the conduct during the attack and for the cover-up that was perpetrated at the highest levels of the Obama administration.
Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., President of the Center for Security Policy, responded to the issuing of this report by renewing the Center’s call for the establishment, instead, of a select committee to get to the bottom of the Benghazigate scandal.
The American people are entitled to know the truth about what happened before, during and following the attack last year in Benghazi on 9/11. While the existing, standing committees have shed some light on pieces of this sordid affair, it is now evident that that truth simply is unlikely to be forthcoming in the absence of an aggressive investigative effort with real teeth.
We believe this progress report reinforces the request recently made by 700-plus Special Forces veterans urging Congress to establish a select committee pursuant to House Resolution 36, sponsored by Rep. Frank Wolf and a majority of the House Republican caucus. It is time for real progress and a select committee evidently is necessary to get it.
Concerned citizens can help get this select committee established by urging their representatives to endorse H.Res.36 by going to www.EndtheCoverup.com.
Washington, D.C.: On the eve of a confirmation hearing on the nomination of Thomas Perez, President Obama’s pick to become the next Secretary of Labor, the Center for Security Policy released a 20-minute video featuring comments by six prominent public policy practitioners and experts urging the Senate to reject this selection. This “virtual press conference” (VPC) offers a litany of extremely troubling behavior spanning the nominee’s career prior to and during his tenure in his current position as Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights.
The following participants and topics are featured in the “Reject Perez” video:
Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., President of the Center for Security Policy, hosts the VPC and addressesPerez’s leading role in the Obama administration-wide effort to embrace, legitimate and empower the Muslim Brotherhood and its operatives.
Chris Farrell, Director of Investigations at Judicial Watch, describes Perez’s radical political philosophy and conduct before and during his time in the Justice Department.
Anita MonCrief, who once was a member of the hard-left group, ACORN, and is now a voting integrity activist with True the Vote, discusses Perez’s troubling proclivities with respect to immigration and labor law stemming in part from his past-presidency of Casa de Maryland, an organization that helps illegal aliens violate federal statutes.
Hans von Spakovsky, former counsel to one of Perez’s predecessors as Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, who decries the “toxic culture” and mismanagement inside that organization as a result of the incumbent’s leadership – and the prevarication he engaged in during the course of a highly critical examination of the Perez tenure by the Justice Department’s Inspector General.
Rosemary Jenks, Director of Government Relations at Numbers USA, who questions whether the Senate can responsibly entrust the U.S. Labor Department to an individual who has worked to enable illegal aliens to take jobs from American workers.
J. Christian Adams, a former career attorney in the U.S. Department of Justice’s Voting Section details various actions – some taken personally by Perez and others by his organization on his watch – that have subverted the principle of equal justice under the law.
On the occasion of the release of the Reject Perez video, Mr. Gaffney observed:
Tom Perez is perhaps the most controversial of President Obama’s nominees to Cabinet positions in his second administration – and that is saying something in light of the competition for that dubious distinction. His past record and present mismanagement, if not actual malfeasance, at the Justice Department should disqualify him from serious consideration for not only the job of Secretary of Labor, but for any position of responsibility in the U.S. government.
(There were some sound issues in the beginning. Go to 0.13.45. Frank Gaffney starts at 0.16.59. Daniel Pipes begins at 0.24.21.
Delivered by Dr. Daniel Pipes
“The Obama Administration’s Middle East Policy”
The Reserve Officers Association, in conjunction with the Center for Security Policy and the David Horowitz Freedom Center, hosted Dr. Daniel Pipes, President of the Middle East Forum, to give this year’s Jackson-Kyl Lecture on National Security, part of the living legacy of two our nation’s great practitioners in that portfolio: the late Senator Henry M. (Scoop) Jackson (D-WA) and Jon Kyl (R-AZ).
This event is sponsored by:
The Defense Education Forum of ROA
The Center for Security Policy
In 2011, the Center for Security Policy assembled a 2 page flyer that succinctly explains the differences between the rights guaranteed in the US Constitution and Shariah.
ARTICLE VI : THE CONSTITUTION IS THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND
CONSTITUTION: ARTICLE VI: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby”
SHARIAH: “The source of legal rulings for all acts of those who are morally responsible is Allah.” a1.1, UMDAT AL-SALIK or The Reliance of the Traveller, commonly accepted work of Sha- riah jurisprudence); “There is only one law which ought to be followed, and that is the Sharia,” SEYED QUTB; “Islam wishes to destroy all states and governments anywhere on the face of the earth which are opposed to the ideology and program of Islam regardless of the country or the nation which rules it. The purpose of Islam is to set up a State on the basis of its own ideology and program.” SEYED ABUL A’ALA MAUDUDI
FIRST AMENDMENT : FREEDOM OF RELIGION
CONSTITUTION: FIRST AMENDMENT: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
SHARIAH: “Those who reject Islam must be killed. If they turn back (from Islam), take hold of them and kill them wherever you find them.” QURAN 4:89 “Whoever changed his [Is- lamic] religion, then kill him,” SAHIH AL-BUKHARI, 9:84:57. In historic and modern Shariah states, Shariah law enforces dhimmi status (second-class citizen, apartheid-type laws) on non-Muslims, prohibiting them from observing their religious practices publicly, building or repairing churches, raising their voices during prayer or ringing church bells; if dhimmi laws are violated in the Shariah State, penalties are those used for prisoners of war: death, slavery, release or ransom. o9.14, o11.0-o11.11, UMDAT AL-SALIK
FIRST AMENDMENT : FREEDOM OF SPEECH
CONSTITUTION: FIRST AMENDMENT: Congress shall not abridge “the freedom of speech.” SHARIAH: Speech defaming Islam or Muhammad is considered “blasphemy” and is punishable by death or imprisonment.
FIRST AMENDMENT : FREEDOM TO DISSENT
CONSTITUTION: FIRST AMENDMENT: “Congress cannot take away the right of the people to pe- tition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
SHARIAH: Non-Muslims are not to harbor any hostility toward the Islamic state or give com- fort to those who disagree with Islamic government.
SECOND AMENDMENT : RIGHT TO SELF-DEFENSE
CONSTITUTION: SECOND AMENDMENT: “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
SHARIAH: Under historic and modern dhimmi laws, non-Muslims cannot possess swords, firearms or weapons of any kind.
FIFTH, SIXTH & SEVENTH AMENDMENTS : RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS AND FAIR TRIAL
CONSTITUTION: FIFTH AMENDMENT: “no person shall be held to answer for a capital or other- wise infamous crime… without due process of law.” SIXTH AMENDMENT: guarantees a “pub- lic trial by an impartial jury.” SEVENTH AMENDMENT: “the right of trial by jury shall be preserved.”
SHARIAH: “Muhammad said, ‘No Muslim should be killed for killing a Kafir (infidel).’” HADITH SAHIH AL-BUKHARI Non-Muslims are prohibited from testifying against Muslims. A woman’s testimony is equal to half of a man’s.
EIGHTH AMENDMENT : NO CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT
CONSTITUTION: EIGHTH AMENDMENT: “nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”
SHARIAH: Under Shariah punishments are barbaric: “Cut off the hands of thieves, whether they are male or female, as punishment for what they have done – a deterrent from Allah.” QURAN 5:38 A raped woman is punished: “The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication – flog each of them with a hundred stripes” SURA 24:2
FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT : RIGHT TO EQUAL PROTECTION AND DUEPROCESS
CONSTITUTION: FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
Shariah: Under dhimmi laws enforced in modern Shariah states, Jews, Christians and other non-Muslims are not equal to Muslims before the law. Under Shariah law, women, girls, apostates, homosexuals and “blasphemers” are all denied equality under the law.
Rep. Frank Wolf called a press conference outside the capitol to discuss his sponsorship of H. Res. 36, which would create a special congressional committee to investigate the failures that contributed to the deadly jihadist attack in Benghazi, Libya last year. He was joined by Family Research Council’s Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin, former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and former member of Delta Force. Boykin represented Special Operations Speaks, a group of ex-special forces operators who came together to write a letter to Members of Congress, urging them to commit to getting to the bottom of what happened in Benghazi, and to end the administration’s cover-up. Finally, the Center for Security Policy’s Frank Gaffney spoke about the implications of the attack in Libya on America’s national security and foreign policy in the Middle East/North Africa region.
Tell your Congressmen to support H.Res 36, which would create a House Select Committee to investigate the September 11 terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya.
In a conference call with bloggers, yesterday, Frank Gaffney mentioned a talking point that then Sec. of State Hillary Clinton repeated during her hearing on Benghazi. ”We are confronting a global jihadist threat,” she told the Senators several times. But the failure that was manifest on Sept 11, Gaffney reminded us, was that the Regime didn’t recognize the global jihadist threat in any way shape or form. Clinton failed to countenance the global jihadist threat until she was heading out the door.
Another thing Gaffney thought was kind of stunning was the absence of any of the folks who survived the attack from the public domain. He called it a “witness suppression program.”
The day before Hillary Clinton testified to both House and Senate committees on the Libya terror attack, Jennifer Griffen and Adam Housley posted a string of “Facts and questions about what happened in Benghazi” at Fox News. Unfortunately, most of those questions remain unanswered. A review of these questions now helps underscore how serious the failures in Benghazi are and leads us to the inescapable conclusion that there is indeed a massive cover-up:
DELAY IN MILITARY RESPONSE
The facts:
Fox News has learned that U.S. Marines who were part of a FAST (Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team) responding to Libya were told by the State Department to deplane, change out of their U.S. military uniforms and put on civilian clothes before flying to Tripoli — a decision that delayed them from launching by approximately 90 minutes, according to senior military officials who briefed Congress. The FAST team, which was made up of about 50 Marines, was ordered by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta to launch from Rota, Spain, the night of the attack on the Benghazi diplomatic mission.
Members of the Special Operations teams sent from Fort Bragg, N.C. and the Commander’s In Extremis Force in nearby Croatia say they were never given permission to enter Libya, even though some were just a short flight away in Europe.
The Accountability Review Board appointed by Clinton and overseen by Adm. Mike Mullen and former Ambassador Thomas Pickering concluded: “The Board members believe every possible effort was made to rescue and recover Ambassador Stevens and Sean Smith. The interagency response was timely and appropriate, but there simply was not enough time for armed U.S. military assets to have made a difference.”
The questions:
Why was it necessary for those Marines to change into civilian clothing when it was apparent that U.S. government officials were in imminent danger?
Did the State Department ever secure permission from Libya and Italy to fly armed units and flights to Libya the night of the attack?
U.S. military planes based at both Sigonella and Aviano, Italy, must have permission from the Italian government on a case-by-case basis to take off armed. According to former U.S. military commanders, this is an issue that can stymie rescue efforts, if the State Department does not manage to secure the appropriate permissions from the host government — Italy, in this case. If those permissions were not secured, is it safe to assume the State Department was reluctant to ask the U.S. military to help in Libya before, during or after the Sept. 11 attack?
Were they concerned about a Black Hawk Down-type situation, losing military assets trying to help with a rescue?
The facts:
Defense Department spokesman George Little says that the FAST team would not have been in Libya in time to save any lives, and any delays to change out of military uniforms likely did not make a difference since all surviving State Department personnel left the consulate for the CIA Annex about an hour and 45 minutes after the attack began at 9:42 p.m. Libyan time.
However, even according the ARB timeline, Ambassador Chris Stevens’ body was not returned to the Benghazi airport until 8:25 a.m. on Sept. 12.
He remained missing for nearly 11 hours.
The question:
Should more have been done to try to retrieve his body from the Benghazi hospital?
DISCREPANCIES IN OFFICIAL DOD TIMELINE
The facts:
The official Defense Department timeline and the independent Accountability Review Board state that the European Commander in Extremis Force that AFRICOM commander Gen. Carter Ham ordered to Sigonella from a training mission in Europe arrived at 7:57 p.m. on Sept. 12 (nearly 22 hours after the attack began). Fox News has reported it was training in nearby Croatia, a short flight away.
Fox News has learned that a 12-member alert force from the CIF team who were staged to Sigonella from Croatia arrived at the staging base in southern Italy within several hours of being alerted of the attack — but they were not given permission to move into Libya.
Fox News has also learned that the team of Tier One special operators who took off from the United States landed in Sigonella air base in southern Italy at about 7:30 a.m. local time – an hour before Stevens’ body was retrieved.
And yet the official Defense Department timeline says that this National Mission Force team did not arrive in Sigonella until 9:28 p.m. Libyan time on Sept. 12 (nearly 24 hours after the attack began).
The question:
Why the discrepancy in the official Defense Department timeline and the time that those special operators say they landed in Sigonella from the United States?
“FAST MOVERS” WERE PROMISED
The facts:
The quick reaction force that was mobilized from the Libyan capital was made up of five Americans — including Glen Doherty, who was on contract with the CIA’s Global Response Staff (or GRS), and two Delta Force special operators who were in Libya on a separate assignment. That was all the hastily rented plane could hold, according to the State Department Review Board. Stevens used the cellphone of Regional Security Officer 1, who is currently recovering at Walter Reed. Stevens was speaking with the Embassy in Tripoli at 9:50 p.m. from the safe room where he and RSO1 had retreated for safety.
When the reaction team left Tripoli for Benghazi several hours after the attack began, they were told by one of the senior U.S. security officials at the Embassy that there would be “fast movers above Benghazi” when they arrived. “Fast movers” is a reference to military jets used to fly over a combat situation. It was a reference to F-18s, F-15s or F-16s that would have been flown in from Europe.
The team that left for Benghazi assumed they would have air cover when they landed. Instead, they got held up at the Benghazi airport without transportation and did not arrive at the CIA Annex to help with the evacuation until 5 a.m. local time on Sept. 12 (more than seven hours after the attack had begun.) Air support never came.
Doherty, a former Navy SEAL, was a part of that team and was killed by a mortar while he and Tyrone Woods manned defensive positions on the roof. Woods did not die immediately from the mortar attack. He bled out over several hours, according to one eyewitness who was there that night.
Fox News has also learned that some of Stevens’ in-country security detail did not accompany him to Benghazi on Sept 11.
The questions:
Why was the “fast movers” team never sent from Italy?
Why did highly trained members of the diplomatic security service remain behind in Tripoli, and why did Stevens take only a skeletal security team to Benghazi?
The Board found that Stevens made the decision to travel to Benghazi independently of Washington. His plans “were not shared thoroughly with the Embassy’s country team, who were not fully aware of planned movements off the compound,” according to independent investigators. Why the secrecy?
WHAT WAS THE CIA DOING IN BENGHAZI?
The facts:
The U.S. post in Benghazi consisted of two parts – the diplomatic consulate and a CIA Annex. Details about the extent of the annex’s work was unclear.
“General Ham did not have complete visibility of the extent and number of government personnel in Benghazi in the event that a NEO (Noncombatant Evacuation Operation) was required,” according to a report by Sens. Joe Lieberman and Susan Collins, even though the Defense Department “assumes responsibility for evacuation of diplomatic personnel, U.S. citizens…in crises. AFRICOM was responsible for working with Department of State officials in Libya to develop and coordinate Noncombatant Evacuation Operations (NEO) plans for the diplomatic facilities in the region.”
The questions:
What was the CIA doing in Benghazi establishing one of its largest hubs in North Africa without informing AFRICOM commander Carter Ham?
Why did Stevens feel the need to be in Benghazi on Sept. 11? He went to the CIA Annex for a briefing the day before. And why did communications specialist Sean Smith travel to Benghazi the week before Stevens’ arrival if he was simply going to Benghazi to attend the opening of an “American corner” at a local school, as reported in the ARB?
What was the meeting with the Turkish envoy about on the night of Sept. 11 — has the FBI interviewed the Turkish diplomat?
The facts:
The Embassy and Stevens were in the process of shutting down the Benghazi mission, and the State Department had authorized it to be closed in December 2012.
“Another key driver behind the weak security platform in Benghazi was the decision to treat Benghazi as a temporary, residential facility, not officially notified to the host government, even though it was also a full time office facility,” the ARB report concluded.
Rep. Ted Poe, R-Texas, who was just made the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Terrorism, Non-Proliferation and Trade, has been demanding answers from the Pentagon about what U.S. personnel were doing in Benghazi and has been frustrated about the administration’s unwillingness to answer his questions.
“There are a lot of contradictions and inconsistencies in these reports,” Poe told Fox News.
He has asked whether the U.S. or its allies furnished any rebel groups in Libya with weapons during the uprising against Muammar Qaddafi — in particular Ansar al-Shariah, the group largely believed to be responsible for the consulate attack.
The question:
Poe, in an interview with Fox News, asked “did we help facilitate in some way, or know about the movement of weapons to Libyan rebels and did we help, know about, or get involved in the weapons movement from Libya to Syria?”
WHAT DID THE NATIONAL COMMAND AUTHORITY AUTHORIZE?
The facts:
Undersecretary of State for Management Patrick Kennedy was running the Operations Center overseeing the rescue on Sept. 11 at the State Department. As the attack began, the Tactical Operations Center in the U.S. mission Benghazi “triggered an audible alarm, and immediately alerted the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli and DS (Diplomatic Security) headquarters in Washington. These notifications were quickly transmitted from the Department of State to the Department of Defense. DS headquarters maintained open phone lines with the DS personnel throughout the attack.”
But the defense secretary and Joint Chiefs Chairman Martin Dempsey were not alerted to the attack for 50 minutes, and they in turn did not raise the issue with the president until a previously scheduled meeting with Obama at the White House at 5 p.m. — one hour and 18 minutes after the attack began.
“That same DS agent (at the consulate) also called the annex to request assistance from security personnel there, who immediately began to prepare to aid the U.S. personnel at the diplomatic facility,” according to the Senate Homeland Security Committee’s report.
The CIA response team from the annex arrived at the consulate which was one mile away within 25 minutes. CIA Director David Petraeus was in the CIA operations center overseeing the rescue that night and did not leave until all U.S. personnel were accounted for. Petraeus flew to Tripoli in subsequent weeks to interview the station chief and others about what happened that night and found there was no delay in rescue efforts.
The Accountability Review Board, we have since learned, did not interview all members of the CIA’s Global Response Staff who were at the CIA Annex that night, at least one of whom says his team was not given permission at first to go and help at the “consulate” after security personnel put out immediate calls for help — a charge the CIA refutes.
The diplomatic security officer who repeatedly re-entered the smoke-filled premises to try to find Stevens also says he was not interviewed by Mullen and Pickering’s team. He says the senior leadership at the State Department did not make them available to the Accountability Review Board.
The questions:
Where was John Brennan, the president’s chief counterterrorism adviser, the afternoon of the attack?
Are there minutes from the Situation Room?
What was his advice to the president that afternoon and evening?
Was anybody at the CIA Annex told to stand down or to wait before responding to the consulate?
David Reaboi, Vice President for Strategic Communications at the Center for Security Policy, appeared on FoxNews.com to discuss the increasingly deadly weapons Syrian jihadist groups are using during the Civil War there. He notes the latest news about the sophisticated and expensive AS50 sniper rifle (or a copy) in the hands of a Hamas-run rebel militia called the Descendants of the Prophet Brigade, and argues against the US intervening in the conflict. Despite the heartbreaking casualties of civil war, now in its second year, there is no good outcome for the United States.
David raised some important points during the interview:
Recent NYT reporting reveals Qatar and Saudi money is being used to send arms into Syria from Croatia possibly with the cooperation of the CIA
The Independent Commission (ARB – Accountability Review Board) criticized the State Department for calling in the February 17th Martyrs Brigade for security at the consulate in Benghazi.
David says he doesn’t trust our intelligence bureaucracy to know who the good guys and the bad guys are because they have removed the study of ideology from the equation. “So once you take out what these guys actually believe, all you’re left with is competing personalities, and that doesn’t tell you very much about where they want to go in the long run.”
It is the position of the Center For Security Policy that the United States should not become involved in the Syrian war because we would be forced to support “the bad guys”. The choice being discussed in Washington is between “moderate” Islamist groups like the Muslim Brotherhood versus more militant Salafi or al-Qaeda al-Nusra front type groups. There is no good outcome.
Well the Syrian rebel factions have settled down to decide on who should be their interim Prime Minister, and shockingly the winner is a Texan (but not Rick Perry.) No, it’s Ghassan Hitto, an information technology specialist from Texas, and former CAIR employee (h/t Jihad Watch):
Mr. Hitto and his wife, Suzanne, an American schoolteacher, have four children, all born in the United States, where Mr. Hitto advocated for Muslim Americans after 9/11 as a representative of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
Nor of course is Hitto alone within the Syrian rebels. Louay Safi, formerly of the Muslim Brotherhood front group, the International institute of Islamic Thought (among others) and a former advisor to the Pentagon, currently heads up the Syrian National Council’s political office. The SNC has long been understood to be one of the Muslim Brotherhood’s principle organs in Syria.
Add to that the fact that Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi was recruited into the Muslim Brotherhood while attending the University of Southern California, and it looks like the United States is by far the biggest incubator for future Islamist Heads of State.
One might also be tempted to ask how it is that individuals of little renown outside of being members of North American Muslim Brotherhood fronts so easily transition to leadership roles of Muslim Brotherhood organizations in other countries? After all, we are repeatedly (falsely) assured that there is no “Global Muslim Brotherhood”, with an international viewpoint and plan, only a disparate group of organizations under that banner, each with their on national view points and focuses.
Kyle Shideler is the Director of Research and Communications at the Endowment for Middle East Truth (EMET). He is a contributing author of Saudi Arabia and the Global Islamic Terrorism Network: America and the West’s Fatal Embrace, and has been published in the InFocus, the quarterly journal of the Jewish Policy Center, and National Security Proceedings, the quarterly journal of the Center for Security Policy, as well as BigPeace.com, The American Thinker, Breitbart.com, The Blaze, Family Security Matters and FrontPage Magazine. Kyle has briefed congressional staffers, law enforcement officers and intelligence officials on matters ranging from the Iranian nuclear program to Saudi influence operations.
Also being made available live on youtube for free:
About the Speakers
Lars Hedegaard is a portrait of courage, tenacity, and wit, under even the most trying circumstances. Hedegaard is President of the Danish Free Press Society, a historian and a journalist. He is also the survivor of a recent assassination attempt on his life last month in his home in Denmark. Lars Hedegaard in the Wall Street Journal | Lars Hedegaard and the Enemies of Truthfulness
Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch, a program of the David Horowitz Freedom Center, and the author of twelve books, including two New York Times bestsellers, The Truth About Muhammad and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) (both Regnery). His latest book is Did Muhammad Exist? An Inquiry Into Islam’s Obscure Origins (ISI).
Tiffany Gabbay serves as Assistant Editor and Foreign Affairs Editor for TheBlaze and has been a writer for over a decade. Her passion for politics and expertise in Middle East affairs was fostered at an early age by her father, a successful entrepreneur and Israeli war hero. Previously, Tiffany worked as a journalist on Capitol Hill where she interviewed some of the Beltway’s biggest names including Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Rep. Michele Bachmann, Sen. Dick Durbin and many others. She is a graduate of the National Journalism Center in Washington, D.C. and studied communications at the London Institute – University of the Arts, London.
Andrew G. Bostom (MD, MS) is an author and Associate Professor of Medicine at Brown University Medical School. He is also well known for his writings on Islam as the author ofThe Legacy of Jihad (2005), and editor of 2008 anthology of primary sources and secondary studies on the theme of Muslim antisemitism,The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism: From Sacred Texts to Solemn History. In October 2012 Bostom published his third compendium Sharia versus Freedom: The Legacy of Islamic Totalitarianism (Prometheus Books).
Michael Graham is a talk radio host, writer, and conservative political commentator. The author of four books, including the first major publisher book on the Tea Party movement-”THAT’S NO ANGRY MOB, THAT’S MY MOM!” (Regnery, 2010)-Michael is also a columnist for the Boston Herald.
By Anita Crane:
Lars Hedegaard is a portrait of courage, tenacity, and wit, under even the most trying circumstances. Hedegaard is President of the Danish Free Press Society, a historian and a journalist. He is also the survivor of a recent assassination attempt on his life last month in his home in Denmark.
Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch, a program of the David Horowitz Freedom Center, and the author of twelve books, including two New York Times bestsellers, The Truth About Muhammad and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) (both Regnery). His latest book is Did Muhammad Exist? An Inquiry Into Islam’s Obscure Origins (ISI).
Tiffany Gabbay serves as Assistant Editor and Foreign Affairs Editor for TheBlaze and has been a writer for over a decade. Her passion for politics and expertise in Middle East affairs was fostered at an early age by her father, a successful entrepreneur and Israeli war hero. Previously, Tiffany worked as a journalist on Capitol Hill where she interviewed some of the Beltway’s biggest names including Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Rep. Michele Bachmann, Sen. Dick Durbin and many others. She is a graduate of the National Journalism Center in Washington, D.C. and studied communications at the London Institute – University of the Arts, London.
Andrew G. Bostom (MD, MS) is an author and Associate Professor of Medicine at Brown University Medical School. He is also well known for his writings on Islam as the author ofThe Legacy of Jihad (2005), and editor of 2008 anthology of primary sources and secondary studies on the theme of Muslim antisemitism,The Legacy of Islamic Antisemitism: From Sacred Texts to Solemn History. In October 2012 Bostom published his third compendium Sharia versus Freedom: The Legacy of Islamic Totalitarianism (Prometheus Books).
Michael Graham is a talk radio host, writer, and conservative political commentator. The author of four books, including the first major publisher book on the Tea Party movement-”THAT’S NO ANGRY MOB, THAT’S MY MOM!” (Regnery, 2010)-Michael is also a columnist for the Boston Herald.
