Stephen Coughlin, author of Catastrophic Failure, analyzes how interfaith dialogues blind Americans of sharia danger

3673405460 (1)

E-BOOK RELEASE: “Bridge-Building” to Nowhere

Center for Security Policy, Nov. 13, 2015:

STEPHEN COUGHLIN, Author of “Catastrophic Failure: The Blindfolding of America in the Face of Jihad”:

  • How the Muslim Brotherhood hides behind inter-faith dialogues
  • Implications of the Countering Violent Extremism movement
  • Muslim Brotherhood’s hand in developing the CVE narrative
  • Whitewashing in US hate speech laws
  • How designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization changes the CVE narrative
  • Civilization jihad and death by one’s own hand
  • Supporting Egyptian leader el-Sisi against radical Islam

podcast 2


Yale University: Weighed and Found Wanting

Study of Islamic Law and Civilization at Yale Law School, left, and Muslims in New Delhi in 2006 protesting publication in the West of cartoons of Muhammad, right. (Photos: PPD/ Saurabh Das/AP)

Study of Islamic Law and Civilization at Yale Law School, left, and Muslims in New Delhi in 2006 protesting publication in the West of cartoons of Muhammad, right. (Photos: PPD/ Saurabh Das/AP)

People’s Pundit Daily, OCTOBER 26, 2015 BY

In 2008 Basak Otus, a writer for Yale Daily News, the leading news source for Yale University wrote an article that started:

English majors getting tired of Shakespeare and Wordsworth will soon be able to turn to Yale’s libraries for a poet of a different kind altogether: Osama bin Laden.

The backlash to this article should have been taken as a prophetic warning of what was to come, akin to the handwriting on the wall of King Belshazzar of Babylon in the Book of Daniel. In that story, the fingers of a man’s hand appeared and wrote on the wall an ominous warning that the Prophet Daniel interpreted as meaning:

1) God has numbered your kingdom, and finished it.

2) You have been weighed in the balances, and found wanting.

3) Your kingdom has been divided, and given away.

Basak Otis’ article in 2008 pointed out that Yale University no longer had America’s best interests at heart, but was in a love affair with one of the most notorious men of the modern era: Osama bin Laden. Perhaps the article would have faded into the background and remained forgotten if Yale woke up when it was attacked that June by a jihadist firebombing, which was intended to destroy their power plant.

But the wake-up call was ignored.

Yale University reverted to its love affair with Osama bin Laden in September 2009 and published a sharia compliant version of a book about Muhammad cartoons, by censoring the illustrations from being printed. This was less than three months after the attempted fire-bombing.

It was Yale University’s overt attempt to display “dhimmitude”–submission to Muslims–rather than show their heritage as great defenders of the First Amendment. Yale had the opportunity to take a strong stand for America and her beliefs in liberty for all of her citizens! It was a chance to be seen as the University that defends the First Amendment. Yale, however chose to become an example of “being weighed and found wanting” in their defense of the US Constitution.

In 2014 Yale Law School hosted Rachid Al-Ghannouchi to speak to its students and thecommunity as well. Rachid is a member of the Ennahda Party in Tunisia. Ennahda is the Muslim Brotherhood entity in Tunisia. Osam bin Laden was and is still counted as a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. Yale University has people that vet public speakers. How is it possible they did not know that Al-Ghannouchi was a staunch defender of Hamas, a US declared terrorist entity?

Yale’s last act of dhimmitude was their receipt of $10 million dollars from the son of Saleh Abdallah Kamel, a documented financer of al-Qaeda with banking ties with Osama bin Laden, himself. Yale has agreed to place an Islamic Law Center in their Law School, but refuses to acknowledge that Islamic law is sharia. This act equates Sharia with the US Constitution.

The act of placing an Islamic Law Center at Yale forces the university to fight itself. Those studying at Yale to earn degrees in its seminary must take a stand, it is their Christian duty. The Music School also must fight this as Sharia requires the destruction of musical instruments and the very concept of a Music School.

The writing was on the wall in 2008. It seems 2015 is the year that Yale becomes divided against itself and will soon no longer exist as the great educational institution it once was.

Can Yale survive its Dhimmitude? I think not.

Paul Sutliff is an educator and research writer particularly focused on Islam, whose work has been recognized by Ryan Mauro of Clarion Project and FOX News. His latest book is Civilization Jihad and the Myth of Moderate Islam.

Islam and 9/11 Not Connected, 12-Year-Olds Taught in America

BOOK RELEASE: Offensive and Defensive Lawfare: Fighting Civilization Jihad in America’s Courts










Center for Security Policy, 27 October 2015:

For Immediate Release                                           

For more information contact: Adam Savit | 202-719-2413 |


In Offensive and Defensive Lawfare: Fighting Civilization Jihad in America’s Courts, David Yerushalmi, Esq., Director of the American Freedom Law Center (AFLC) and General Counsel for the Center for Security Policy, and AFLC co-founder Robert J. Muise, Esq. describe the use by our Islamic supremacist enemies of U.S. jurisprudence to compel submission to the doctrine they call shariah. As with so many other facets of the Muslim Brotherhood’s stealthy, pre-violent jihad against this country, most of us are unaware that such lawfare is taking place, let alone with such deleterious effects.

Even more importantly, Messrs. Yerushalmi and Muise lay out their recommendations for an offensive strategy to defend the U.S. Constitution and the rights it guarantees our countrymen and women from any further encroachment by Islamic law.Photoshop CCScreenSnapz001 In stark contrast to the longstanding use of such techniques to intimidate or suppress freedom-loving peoples, offensive lawfare against the Brotherhood and its ilk is a relatively nascent area of the law, in which the authors are true pioneers and formidable innovators.

Center for Security Policy President Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. said on the occasion of the publication of the latest monograph in the Center’s Civilization Jihad Reader Series:

“In Offensive and Defensive Lawfare, David Yerushalmi and Robert Muise, have added to the great service they perform for the nation every day through their public interest law firm’s pro bono representation of exponents of religious and other freedoms. We hope that this treatment of their battlespace – with its clear depiction of the Islamic supremacists’ lawfare and insights into how this front of the civilization jihad can best be countered – will inspire many other accomplished litigators to join the authors in this fight.”

The Center for Security Policy/Secure Freedom is proud to present this monograph as a superb addition to its Civilization Jihad Reader Series . Offensive and Defensive Lawfare: Fighting Civilization Jihad in America’s Courts is available for purchase in kindle andpaperback format on

—> Full PDF of the newly released monograph



The Glazov Gang, by Jamie Glazov, Oct. 27, 2015:

This special edition of The Glazov Gang was joined by David Kupelian, the author of the new book, The Snapping of the American Mind and vice-president and managing editor of the online news giant WND.

David discussed Stealth Jihad vs. America, unveiling the Left’s enabling of the Muslim Brotherhood’s offensive. He also outlined the numerous ways the progressive agenda has spawned The Snapping of the American Mind.


South Africa Hosts Hamas

949702009Center for Security Policy, by Kyle Shideler, Oct. 23, 2015:

South Africa’s ruling party The African National Congress (ANC) is currently playing host to foreign terrorist organization Hamas, including leaders Khaled Mashaal and Mousa Abu Marzook. Mashaal met personally with South African president Jacob Zuma, exchanged gifts and signed a letter of intent for future cooperation. The ANC Secretary General Gwede Mantashe said the ANC would be “starting a relationship with Hamas” and that the two would work together in “all struggles for freedom of Palestine.”

South Africa’s support for the terrorist organization Hamas does not come as a particular shock. South Africa has grown increasingly close to a number of rogue actors, including Iran, Sudan, and Hamas.

South Africa’s ever-closer alignment with Hamas has been a long time coming, facilitated by local South African Muslim Brotherhood-linked organizations. Specifically, the two organizations that are sponsoring a rally on October 21st Rally, to welcome Hamas, the Muslim Judicial Council and the Al Quds Foundation-South Africa.

The Muslim Judicial Council (MJC) is one of the leading South African Islamic organization established in 1945, but opening its first formal office in 1982. It describes itself as “a Muslim Judiciary” for South Africa, and manages everything from Halal inspection of food to issuing Islamic legal rulings, or fatwas.

It is also the South African branch of the global Hamas fundraising network known asThe Union of the Good. This gives the MJC the same role in South Africa as was played by the Holy Land Foundation (HLF) in the United States. In 2008, HLF and its founders were convicted for their role in supporting material support for Hamas.

Additionally, the president of the MJC serves as a member of the International Union of Muslim Scholars (IUMS). Muslim Brotherhood chief jurist Yusuf Al Qaradawi, whose scholarly authority provides Islamic legal support for Hamas’s activities, including suicide bombings, heads both the UoG and the IUMS.  As the Center noted in its occasional paper on Qaradawi and the IUMS:

Founded in Dublin, Ireland, the International Union of Muslim Scholars bills itself as an organization open to Islamic scholars of all sects and schools of Islamic law. Despite this, IUMS maintains close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and the Brotherhood’s Palestinian wing Hamas, and numerous individuals known or suspected of Brotherhood ties make up its membership. According to the Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Watch-a repository of information on Muslim Brotherhood organizations and members- Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas operatives from around the world have served with IUMS.

The Al Quds International Foundation-South Africa, is the South African branch of the Al Quds International Foundation, a specially designated terrorist entity, and its South African chapter is closely-linked to the MJC. The Treasury Department noted:

Hamas’s leadership runs all of the foundation’s affairs through Hamas members who serve on the Board of Trustees, the Board of Directors, and other administrative committees. All documents, plans, budgets, and projects of Al-Quds are drafted by Hamas officials.  Several senior Hamas officials, including Specially Designated Global Terrorists Musa Abu-Marzuq and Usama Hamdan, served on Al-Quds’ Board of Trustees.

The General Secretary of the Al Quds International Foundation is Dr. Mohammed Akram al-Adlouni. Akram is the author of the notorious Explanatory Memorandumdocument, a Muslim Brotherhood planning document entered into evidence by prosecutors in the HLF trial. In the Memorandum Akram describes a long-term Muslim Brotherhood plan as a “civilization-jihadist” process to undermine “Western Civilization from within.”

South Africa’s descent into what is essentially state support for terrorism, did not happen overnight.  According to a leaked document which purports to be a South African Intelligence report on Hamas in South Africa, Hamas, together with international Muslim Brotherhood organizations, and South African Brotherhood organizations like the South African Muslim Students Associations (established in 1968), have long been at work proselytizing, recruiting and indoctrinating South African Muslims. According to the report the surveillance of these activities was cancelled when it revealed Islamic terrorist groups, including Hamas, were meeting on South African soil with politically connected South African Muslims at an Islamic Conference in Laudium in 1996. Similarly in March 2010, the Obama administration, thanks to political sympathy to MB organizations, halted further prosecutions of Hamas figures in the United States. MB-linked organizations have aggressively sought to eliminate surveillance of their activities, through political pressure and lawsuits.

While South Africa’s relationship with Israel has always been complex, with South Africa honoring an unrepentant jihadist organization, we see the culmination of a successful Brotherhood effort to influence policy through building alliances with other anti-Western parties.

It would be a mistake to assume that what has taken place in South Africa couldn’t likewise occur in other countries where the Brotherhood is hard at work with a “civilization-jihadist” effort to forge a political environment that not only tolerates the Brotherhood’s jihad against Israel, but openly participates in it.

Ahmed’s Dad Pushes 9/11 Conspiracy Posts, Videos on Arabic Facebook Page


Center for Security Policy, by Kyle Shideler, Oct. 6, 2015:

With the frenzy following his son Ahmed’s bringing a suspicious-looking modified clock to high school, Texas-based Islamic political activist Mohammed Elhassan Mohammed finally succeeded in creating something he’s sought for a long time: a national media event that can be used to shine the light on alleged crimes of the United States, from accusations of “Islamophobia” in Irving, Texas, to American complicity in the 9/11 attacks.

Al Qaeda’s attack on September 11, 2001 is a recurring topic of discussion on Mohammed’s own Arabic-language National Reform Party Facebook page where—beside photos of his family enjoying their newfound fame—are posted articles, photos and videos featuring both implicit, and explicit claims that the 9/11 attacks were a US-sponsored hoax to launch a war against Islam and Muslims.

While still residing in his Dallas suburb, Mohammed has, nonetheless, repeatedly run for president of Sudan as a candidate identified with his own very small political party, “al-Islah al-Watani,” or National Reform. Until recently, the National Reform Facebook page displayed the same profile picture Mohammed Elhassan Mohammed’s used for his personal Facebook profile picture. Mohammed’s National Reform Party page continues to post the same pictures, videos and articles about Ahmed Mohammed, and the Clock saga, as does Mohammed ElHassan on his personal page.

On September 12th, 2015, his National Reform page shared a photo that featured the smoking World Trade Center towers above text in Arabic describing the events of September 11th as “an American media creation” and calls them, “terrorism American style.” It also blames the U.S. for the events of the Arab Spring, calling it a U.S. plan to “foment reprehensible chaos.”

The text describes the attack on 9/11 as a “miracle” for the United States, because it provided justification for an attack, “first an Islamic government, while the second was a mighty Arab state in the Middle East.” The reference is clearly to the U.S. attack on Afghanistan (under the Taliban) and Iraq.

While the text identified the author as one Asad al-Barari, it’s not immediately clearly why Mohammed Elhassan and his National Reform Party chose to share this image and the post on September 12th, but the posting contains no text attempting to rebut or criticize the post for its statements about America.

Nor is this the only questionable post. As recently as September 28th, the National Reform Party page shared an English language video, with Arabic subtitles, which presents conspiracy theory arguments about the September 2001 attack.

The fifteen-minute video—first posted in September 2013—claims to prove explosives were used in bringing down the World Trade Center, attacks Penn & Teller’s 2005 debunking of 9/11 ‘truther’ conspiracy theories and, finally, blames “US military officials, television executives and some Israeli and British government officials” for the attacks.

Below is the full translation of the September 12, 2015 post from Facebook:

The Events of September 11th:There is a saying, “The hater writes them; the fool publishes them; and the idiot believes them.” This applies to the rumors that people both spread and believe; it describes the creation of rumors in all their stages.

Yesterday [Friday, September 11, 2015] was the anniversary observed in the United States of America on what is called “September 11th.” This was the miracle that came to America in the form of terrorism—which offered her the invasion of Islamic countries (headed by Afghanistan and Iraq), which she saw as a great threat—on a golden plate. The first had an Islamic government, while the second was a mighty Arab state in the Middle East.

Without any doubt, the events of September 11th claimed thousands of innocent lives, and violated the basic belief of religions, that civilians should not be harmed in any war. Yet, for its sake, millions of blameless souls have perished—though one state has been spared. One state that exists only on the map.

The events of the Arab Spring, or the despicable chaos that is its true name, were a part of this “September [11th] Strategy,” that the U.S. pursued in sending her armies into Afghanistan and Iraq. The American army destroyed their regular armies, but found that it could not destroy their irregular forces. This is what drove her to foment that reprehensible chaos—an ancient plan to destroy states completely—which was carried out to the letter in all the lands of the Arab Spring. The result was not only thousands of refugees and deaths in every part of the world, but also the huge humiliations that have become the fundamental malaise of the Arabs in everything they do.

Thus [the events of September 11th] are but an American media creation, no matter how some may try to label them as “Islamic terrorism.” They were indeed terrorism, but terrorism American style—terrorism that sweeps away and annihilates whole countries, and not those few buildings in the midst of New York City.

Asad al-Barari

Also see:

The Islamic Threat Is Present in the U.S.

Lt. Gen. “Jerry” Boykin, Cathy Hinners, Clare Lopez and Sandy Rios discuss the threat of Islam in the United States. Photo credit: Tyler O’Neil, PJ Media

Lt. Gen. “Jerry” Boykin, Cathy Hinners, Clare Lopez and Sandy Rios discuss the threat of Islam in the United States.
Photo credit: Tyler O’Neil, PJ Mediana

PJ Media, by Tyler O’Neil, September 29, 2015:

WASHINGTON – Three American women who have been branded as “anti-Muslim” by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) spoke out against the threat of Islamism in the United States at the Family Research Council’s Values Voter Summit on Saturday. Contrary to the rhetoric SPLC and others, these women are not “Islamophobes.”

“Americans need to know the threat is here. So many people, when I say ‘the Muslim Brotherhood,’ they say ‘that’s an Egypt problem.’ It’s not — it’s in every state of this country,” declared Cathy Hinners, a law enforcement instructor and founder of the website

Hinners was joined by Clare M. Lopez, an intelligence expert with a focus on the Middle East, and Sandy Rios, director of government affairs for the American Family Association and Fox News contributor. All three women were attacked in the SPLC’s “Women Against Islam” pamphlet, which has been described by many conservative outlets as a “hit list.”

“This is dangerous because there is a basic principle of Islam which can turn every Muslim into a potential vigilante,” Lopez declared, citing the doctrine that Muslims must “forbid the evil and enjoin the good.” She, Rios and Hinners see the SPLC “hit list” as marking a target on their backs. When Rios declared, “By the way, we all carry,” the crowd erupted in applause.

Islamism in the United States

“Tennessee is ground zero for Muslim activism in the United States,” Hinners declared. In a separate interview with PJ Media, she explained the impact of Islamist activism in the schools.

Hinners specifically mentioned one recent “explosive discovery” in this Bible Belt state. “In one of the counties in Tennessee, we learned that children in seventh grade are saying the Shahada — that there is no God but Allah and that Mohammed is the messenger — in class,” she explained. While the teacher led the students to say this “under the guise of social studies,” Hinners argued that “there is no historical value in saying a prayer or the Islamic profession of faith.”

This is a serious issue because the Shahada is considered the most important part of converting to Islam — it is a public declaration that the speaker embraces the faith, rejects the “polytheism” of Christianity and follows Mohammed as the prophet of Allah.

Hinners also mentioned textbooks with subversive themes and instruction materials provided by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), an organization with alleged ties to Hamas and other terrorist groups. Tennessee’s pacing guide also gives a disproportionate weight to Islamic civilization — 17 days — as opposed to the Roman Empire, which is only given four days of teaching. “We’ve been told by some teachers that they had to skip that part because they don’t have enough time for social studies, so Islam took priority over the Roman Empire.”

Hinners also argued that there are many other groups with terrorist connections here in the U.S. She mentioned the American Muslim Advisory Council (AMAC), arguing that there are “little offshoots” carrying “the ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood, usually run by supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood.”

Islam as a Threat — A Political Religion

“Islam is not like Buddhism or Judaism or Christianity — it is a political system with religious elements,” Rios declared. In a post-conference interview with PJ Media, she clarified her position by contrasting Islam with Christianity.

“Speaking theologically, there could not be more difference between the two faiths,” Rios said. “The God of Christians gave His life to redeem, while Mohammed’s Allah is a god who demands vengeance and blood.” The Fox News contributor added that “Christianity is based on the ability to choose,” while “with Allah, it’s like ‘believe or die.’”

Defending this characterization of Islam, Hinners argued that “Islam was peaceful at first — on page one and two it is — but Mohammed turned violent.” Lt. Gen. (Ret) William G. Boykin, executive vice president at the Family Research Council (FRC), agreed. Boykin explained that the doctrines of “progressive revelation” and “divine abrogation” mean the later, more militaristic passages in the Q’ran supersede the peaceful passages at the beginning.

The military side of Islam explained why the building of a mosque at “ground zero” — the site of the September 11, 2001, attacks in New York City — proved so controversial. “In the days of Mohammed, mosques were military buildings, and it is considered a victory when one is built,” Hinners explained.

Lopez said mosques are still used as military buildings in Islamic countries today. “American troops in the Middle East were surprised to be shot at from the minarets of mosques,” Lopez explained, because the troops thought mosques were merely religious buildings like Christian churches. The gunfire and weapons often found stockpiled in the religious centers proved otherwise.

Islam and Patriotism

During a Q&A session, Boykin was asked why he supports religious freedom for Christians, but not for Muslims. He responded that he supports religious freedom for everyone, but “no religion that threatens our Constitution can be tolerated under that constitution.”

Many Muslims, in advocating for the application of Sharia law (the Islamic legal code) in the United States, are de facto opposing the American constitution, Boykin argued. Rios wholeheartedly agreed.

“Sharia law is the part of Islam that demands obedience, that is brutal to women, enjoins female circumcision, honor killings, and throwing homosexuals from high buildings,” Rios explained.

Practices like female circumcision (forcing a woman to have her clitoris mutilated or removed in order to make her less likely to sleep around) and honor killings (a family putting their daughter to death for various offenses like marrying outside Islam) are rightly condemned as misogynistic under American law. The horrific murder of homosexuals is obviously also illegal in the United States.

Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, founder and president of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD), is an outspoken Muslim patriot, and has supported statewide bans on Sharia law. Jasser and his group represent Muslims who “advocate for the preservation of the founding principles of the United States Constitution, liberty and freedom, through the separation of mosque and state.”

AIFD’s website declares that the organization is dedicated to “directly confronting the ideologies of political Islam and openly countering the common belief that the Muslim faith is inextricably rooted to the concept of the Islamic state (Islamism).”

While the panelists might be expected to disagree with Jasser, claiming that Islam is inescapably political, they had nothing but outspoken praise for the man. “He is a Muslim who has proven his loyalty to this country, and he is worthy of our respect. We need more like Zuhdi Jasser,” Rios declared. “He seems to be a really good man,” Hinners added.

“M. Zuhdi Jasser is a brave man, he is a patriot,” Boykin declared. “But how many M. Zuhdi Jassers do you know?” he asked, pointedly.

As illustrated by their praise for Jasser, the panelists do not consider all Muslims to be enemies of the United States, only those who advocate for what Jasser calls “political Islam” or “Islamism.” Lopez, Rios, Hinners and Boykin are not “anti-Muslim,” as SPLC claimed, but merely anti-Islamist.

In the Middle East, Support the Kurds

This support for American-friendly Muslims also extended to the Kurds, an ethnic group in northern Iraq and the surrounding area, which is currently fighting the Islamic State (ISIS).

“I would never advocate arming Muslim groups, but I would arm the Kurds,” Boykin declared. “I don’t understand why Obama refuses to do so.”

Hinners, who constantly warns about the Islamist influence in her area of Tennessee, called on Americans to reach out to Kurds living in the United States and offer assistance. “There are 1,100 Kurds in the Nashville area. Look for Kurds over here to help the Kurds in the Middle East,” the law enforcement instructor said.

Even so, the Kurds are a minority in the Middle East, and the panelists argued that the region is at war because of conflicting Islamist political ideologies.

“I see the conflict in the former Iraq and former Syria as an intra-Islamic conflict between Sunnis and Shi’ites,” Lopez added. Sunnis and Shi’ites, as the two largest denominations of Islam, have control in various parts of the Middle East. They are divided by the issue of the rightful caliph — the successor to the prophet Mohammed and head of the Islamic state — after Mohammed died.

While a vast majority of Muslims are Sunni, Iran is a Shi’ite state and has emerged in a very dominant position in the Middle East. While the majority of Iraqis are Shi’ite, Saddam Hussein was a Sunni and oppressed his own people. “When the U.S. attacked Iraq, we broke the balance between Sunni and Shi’ite,” allowing the Shi’ites to take the upper hand, Lopez explained.

These politico-religious divisions behind the warfare backed up the panelists’ claims that Islam is largely a political religion. But their support for Jasser and the Kurds also showed their belief that Islam does not necessarily have to be tied to a state ideology.

Contrary to the claims of SPLC and others, these panelists are not “Islamophobes” or “haters,” but Americans weary of a politico-religious ideology opposing their way of life. It’s high time others listened to their concerns and realize the dangers of Islamism.

A conservative fundraiser and commentator, Tyler O’Neil has written for numerous publications, including The Christian Post, National Review, The Washington Free Beacon, The Daily Signal, AEI’s Values & Capitalism, and the Colson Center’s Breakpoint. He enjoys Indian food, board games, and talking ceaselessly about politics, religion and culture.



Frontpage, by Marilyn Stern,Sep. 28, 2015:

American interfaith groups are being infiltrated and undermined by the Muslim Brotherhood-affiliate, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA).  In their eagerness to find Muslim faith partners whom they want to believe share their values of religious tolerance and mutual respect, Jewish interfaith leaders allow themselves to be exploited. Under the guise of interfaith dialogue, Islamist organizations like ISNA that have ties to extremism, insinuate themselves into faith organizations while advancing their hidden agendas.  Faith leaders who disregard ISNA’s ulterior motives place their congregations at risk.

In its June 2015 ruling in favor of Samantha Elauf, a Muslim woman who was denied employment for wearing a headscarf, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the American judiciary’s prohibition on workplace discrimination based upon religious practice.  In the American melting pot, there are benefits to all faiths that successfully negotiate societal challenges between the secular and the religious, but these benefits are only guaranteed by a legal system that upholds a universal human rights standard.  Blind spots in the interfaith movement, however, undermine common cause when religious leaders pursue interfaith outreach at any cost.

One such example was described in an article in a Jewish community paper written by a participant in a Christian/Jewish interfaith partnership with the Muslim organization, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA).  The current head of ISNA’s interfaith relations, Dr. Sayyid M. Syeed, a sociolinguist by training, is a founder and former executive of ISNA.  At the invitation of its rabbi, Nancy Fuchs Kreimer, Syeed met with faith leaders of various denominations, professors of religion, and “interested citizens” at the Reconstructionist Rabbinical College (RRC) in suburban Philadelphia.  The rabbi presented Syeed “to guide our thinking about these issues.” Rabbi Kreimer is founding director of the Multifaith Studies Department of the RRC, the seminary of a branch of Judaism on the left side of the political spectrum and self-described as liberal progressive.

In Kreimer’s article, “Standing with American Muslims, Upholding American Values,” also the title of ISNA’s key interfaith program, the rabbi extolled the virtues of partnering with ISNA in its interfaith initiatives.  She stated that ISNA is the largest membership organization of Muslims in America to support the RRC’s plan to engage in “relationship-building” retreats.  Kreimer’s article was published in the March 10, 2015 issue of the Philadelphia Jewish Federation’s newspaper, the Jewish Exponent, under its editor at the time, Lisa Hostein, whose stated priority for the paper was “inclusiveness.”  Kreimer’s endorsement of ISNA was disseminated to the Exponent’s circulation of 30,000 households.

ISNA’s website page, “About ISNA,” states that it works with various religious organizations on a range of public policy issues to “provide…outreach programs…with religious communities and civic organizations.”  Touted among “ISNA Accomplishments,” is that it has “condemned and rejected the actions of terrorists and terrorism as being completely antithetical to the teachings of Islam.”

Among the “relationship building” ISNA initiatives Kreimer referenced are the program, Shoulder-to-Shoulder, part of an interfaith coalition “dedicated to ending anti-Muslim sentiment”; Walking the Walk, aimed at high school students as a project of the Interfaith Center of Philadelphia and Religions for Peace (USA); and ISNA’s online resource book, Sharing the Well: A Resource Guide for Jewish-Muslim Engagement.  Shoulder-to-Shoulder hosted a leadership seminar for Jewish and Christian “emerging religious leaders” who attended ISNA’s annual convention earlier this month.

What do all these initiatives share in common?  ISNA’s interfaith guide, Dr. Sayyid Syeed.

Who is Dr. Sayyid Syeed?

In 2003, prior to Syeed’s current role as ISNA’s interfaith guide, Syeed met with the editorial board of theDallas Morning News to discuss how reporters “needed to partner with ISNA to promote peace and tolerance.”  Rod Dreher, an editorial writer and columnist at the paper who had looked into ISNA’s board members, asked Syeed why, if ISNA claims to promote peace and tolerance, were so many of its board members directly connected to Islamic extremism.  Syeed’s mask of professorial demeanor abruptly dropped as he shook his fist at Dreher, comparing him to a Nazi inquisitor.  Rather than answering Dreher’s question, Syeed accused Dreher of bigotry and persecution with the veiled threat that Dreher should “repent.”

In Dreher’s words:

I told him mine was a fair question, and that I would appreciate an answer.  I didn’t get one.  But I had learned an important lesson about how groups like his operate: by evading legitimate queries, and browbeating journalists into retreat by calling them bigots and persecutors.

Soon after reporting his experience in the paper, Dreher found himself labeled “The New Face of Hate” on an Islamic blog because of his paper’s investigative articles uncovering “alleged connections between the Holy Land Foundation (HLF) charity and Hamas.”  HLF is a known affiliate of the Muslim Brotherhood, a supremacist Muslim organization with its origins in the Middle East, and Hamas, designated a foreign terrorist organization by the U.S. State Department since 1997.

The term “Islamophobia” is invoked by Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated organizations to avoid scrutiny from journalists like Dreher, enforce Islamic sharia anti-blasphemy laws and restrict freedom of speech.  A mass media campaign to promote the use of the term was launched by the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) in 2005 as the Ten Year Programme of Action.    According to the OIC’s website, it is “the second largest inter-governmental organization after the United Nations which has membership of 57 Member States spread over four continents.”  Since 1998, the OIC has pressed for a U.N. resolutionto counter what it calls discrimination against Islam.  The OIC’s public relations campaign adopted the term “Islamophobia” from a 1997 report by the Runnymede Trust, a British think tank, to muzzle critics of sharia anti-blasphemy law.

The OIC Secretary General endorsed ISNA’s interfaith programs and Syeed attended a June 2013 OIC-hosted meeting in Geneva, Switzerland, held to “determine how best to implement ‘measures to criminalize incitement to imminent violence based on religion or belief.’”  As a result of the OIC’s successful “Islamophobia” propaganda campaign, First Amendment-protected free speech in America has suffered, primarily through self-censorship.  This censorship ranges from a largely complicit mainstream media to individuals intimidated by U.S. Islamist entities attempting to silence them through lawsuits, as part of an intimidation strategy that has come to be called lawfare.  The “Islamophobia” label is a handy tactic employed by Brotherhood groups to shield Islamists from exposure as the OIC inches closer to their goal of criminalizing any perceived slight to Islam.

Dreher’s 2008 Hudson Institute article, “Reporting the Muslim Brotherhood,” included ISNA as one of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s front group organizations.  Challenging Syeed’s disingenuousness, Dreher concluded that while ISNA and other U.S. Muslim Brotherhood-related groups have the right to their beliefs as long as they don’t engage in violence, these groups deserve “informed opposition” to expose their hidden agendas and make them, and their apologists, accountable.

Read more

Islamic Attack on Chattanooga: Why It Happened and What to Do


Published on Aug 29, 2015 by Tin Ship Productions

Islamic Attack on Chattanooga: Why It Happened and What to Do.

01:06 Prayer
01:52 The Pledge of Allegiance
02:19 Introduction by Mark West
07:54 Official Islam
09:52 Objective study of Islam
16:31 Jihad
19:40 Dualism
21:17 Conclusions
23:13 Losing Civilizational War
34:30 Winning Civilizational War
40:44 Voices for the Voiceless
48:53 The Law of Islamic Saturation
50:36 Tears of Jihad
55:12 Questions and Answers

To This Secular Muslim, Ben Carson Had a Point

Photo Illustration by Alex Williams/The Daily Beast

Photo Illustration by Alex Williams/The Daily Beast

Daily Beast, by Asra Q. Nomani, Sep. 24, 2015:

Take it from someone who’s been fighting it her whole adult life: The sad truth is that too many Muslims want to mix mosque and state.
Ben Carson’s blunt remarks about a Muslim president triggered much outrage, even after he partially walked them back. But secular Muslims like me, who reject political Islam, understood what he meant: He doesn’t want a Muslim as president who doesn’t believe in the strict secular separation of mosque and state, so that the laws of the state aren’t at all touched by sharia, or Islamic law derived from the Quran and hadith, the sayings and traditions of prophet Muhammad. Neither do we. We really don’t want a first lady—or a president—in a burka, or face veil.Carson’s comments underscore a political reality in which Muslim communities, not only in far-flung theocracies like Saudi Arabia and Iran, but also in the United States, still struggle with existential questions about whether Islam is compatible with democracy and secularism. This struggle results in the very real phenomenon of “creeping sharia,” as critics in the West call it (and which some Muslims like to mock as an “Islamophobic” allegation). While the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment states the United States “shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,” the Quran states that Allah “takes account of every single thing (72:28),” which has led to the divine mandate by leading Muslim scholars to reject secularism, or alamaniya, or the way of the “world,” derived, from the Arabic root for world, alam.

In too many instances, we are seeing an erosion of those boundaries, in part led by some Muslims, increasingly using America’s spirit of religious accommodation and cultural pluralism to challenge rules that most of the rest of America accepts. Many of those incursions have been led by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a controversial self-described advocacy group for Muslims that, not surprisingly, called for Carson to step down this week.

For example, when I was a girl in New Jersey in the early 1970s, we took our Muslim holidays off, if we wanted, but didn’t demand the rest of the school take the day off with us. Last week, however, four decades later, New Jersey Muslims stormed out of a Jersey City school board meeting after the school board refused to cancel school at the last minute for the Muslim holiday called “Eid al-Adha,” or “the Feast of Sacrifice,” being celebrated Thursday. CAIR has lobbied public school officials for the change for the sake of “diversity and inclusion.

At the meeting, the local NBC news segment showed an older woman yelling in Arabic that the holiday was her “right,” followed by a young Muslim woman, wearing a headscarf and smiling eerily as she said, “We’re no longer the minority. That’s clear from tonight. We’re going to be the majority soon.”

The thinly veiled threat was as disturbing to me as it might be to other Americans. Unspoken is the sharia ruling that Muslims engage in no work or school on the day of Eid-ul Adha, but, instead, as the prophet Muhammad is quoted as saying in a hadith, “O people of Islam, these are days of eating and drinking.”

 Yet it is unreasonable and, quite frankly, selfish for Muslim parents to demand an unplanned holiday, forcing other parents to scramble to find child care, as board member pointed out. But, sadly, on the eve of the “Festival of Sacrifice,” there is one issue that too many Muslims find difficult to sacrifice: Their belief that mosque and state must not be separated but must in fact be intermingled.

Tthis month, an ExpressJet flight attendant, Charee Stanley, a relatively new convert to Islam, demanded the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission reinstate her job after she was put on leave for refusing to serve alcohol. CAIR argued the flight attendant deserved “a religious accommodation.”

But Ali Genc, senior vice president of media relations at Turkish Airlines, said in an interview that his carrier, based in a Muslim country, doesn’t make such allowances, saying, “The service and consumption of alcoholic beverages onboard is regulated in the framework of the rules of Turkish Airlines. In this respect, a refusal of such service by our cabin crew is not possible as a matter of course.”

Some years ago, a Muslim woman, Ginnah Muhammad, demanded her right to enter a Michigan small claims courtroom with a face veil, a demand that was correctly refused. CAIR supported her petition, saying removing the veil meant denying the woman her “constitutional rights.”

Before that, another Muslim woman convert, Sultaana Freeman, sued the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles to allow her to take her driver’s license photo with her veil. CAIR supported her demand, saying the woman “sincerely” believed it would “advance her piety.” These efforts at appealing to schools, courts, and other government structures to suit hyper-conservative interpretations of sharia reveal how some Muslims are going too far in demanding accommodations by U.S. authorities, blurring the mosque and state divide.

Corey P. Saylor, director of the “department to monitor and combat Islamophobia” at CAIR, disputed my argument that the organization has worked to erode secularism in the United States, saying, “CAIR’s legal and political advocacy aims to preserve our nation’s spirit of religious accommodation from efforts to erode it or restrict it to certain faiths.”

He added, “Americans of the Islamic faith have equal rights and responsibilities in civic life and may argue for policies they favor, and win or fail based on a well-established political and legal process to which everyone has, and should have, equal access.”

In the cases that I cited “the courts or relevant political entities make the final decision,” Saylor said, “not us.” Indeed, fortunately, CAIR has so far lost its Florida, New Jersey and Michigan efforts.

Carson wasn’t being hyperbolic in expressing concern. Globally, Muslims express deep problems with separation of mosque and state. In a 2013 Pew Research Center survey, an alarming percentage of Muslims worldwide, numbering 99 percent in Afghanistan and 45 percent in Russia, answered “favor” when asked whether they favor or oppose making sharia the law of the land. A disturbing percentage supported including sharia in family, marriage, and criminal law, including settling property disputes, deciding child custody arrangements, stoning people for adultery, and cutting off the hands of thieves. While to be sure the survey wasn’t conducted in the West, the results reveal cultural mindsets.

In the United States, I first confronted our Muslim community’s difficulty with the concept of secularism in late 2003 when I walked through the front door of my mosque in Morgantown, West Virginia, citing Islamic rights as well as civil rights granted me as a woman in this country. Soon after, the Pittsburgh Post Gazette wrote an article that included this passage: “Dalía Mogahed, outreach coordinator for the Pittsburgh mosque, agrees on Muhammad’s respect for women but says Nomani is viewing the issues through the eyes of a secular feminist rather than the eyes of a Muslim.”

Secular feminist?

I read the passage twice because to me, being a secular Muslim feminist wasn’t a contradiction in terms. To me, though they are few and far between, we have Islamic theologians who advocate for equal rights for women and secularism in governance. But the criticism was a wakeup call to me of the challenges we face advocating for secular values among Muslims. (Mogahed later led survey research at Pew and was a member of an Obama administration advisory council. She didn’t return a request for comment.)

It’s not “time to pull the plug” on Carson’s campaign for his indelicate comments on Islam, as columnist P.J. O’Rourke argues. But it is time to continue the politically incorrect but critical conversation that he started.

The presidential candidate is talking against a backdrop of 9/11 and a reality in which political Islam expresses itself violently in the West and in Muslim countries from Iraq to Indonesia. To me, not acknowledging this real issue among Muslims amounts to another Carson allegation, of Muslims practicing taqiyya, or deception.

Much of the modern-day debate dates back to 1977 when Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, a theological brain trust of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood political party, fighting secularism, wrote, “Al-Hulul al Mustawradah wa Kayfa Janat `alaa Ummatina,” or “How the Imported Solutions Disastrously Affected Our Ummah,” casting secularism and Islam in a cosmic battle, with a section entitled, “Secularism vs. Islam.”

He wrote: “Secularism may be accepted in a Christian society but it can never enjoy a general acceptance in an Islamic society.” Today, even ordinary Muslims ask questions like, “Is it permissible to pray behind imams who…promote democracy and secularism?” The answer from too many in Muslim leadership is no.

Carson dared to address an explosive issue that Muslims are still struggling to resolve on issues of sharia and fiqh, a related concept, referring to Islamic jurisprudence. Not long ago, Ayad Jamal Deen, a former Iraqi parliament member and courageous intellectual and religious cleric, admitted, “In my opinion, the fiqh is more dangerous than nuclear technology.” He acknowledged that “Islam has been politicized and is used as a sword.” We would be wise to listen to advocates of secularism who have battled the forces of political Islam.

In his Fox walk-back interview, Carson said, “Now, if someone has a Muslim background, and they’re willing to reject those tenets and to accept the way of life that we have, and clearly will swear to place our Constitution above their religion, then of course they will be considered infidels and heretics, but at least I would then be quite willing to support them.”

To me, Carson’s words aren’t “anti-Muslim” either, as a Guardian headline described them. They are a realistic mirror on the challenges Muslims today face with the notion of strict secularism.

Even John Esposito, founding director of Georgetown University’s Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, funded by a rich member of the theocratic Saudi ruling family and criticized for publishing “apologist” explanations of Islam, wrote not long ago:

“Many Muslims, in particular Islamists, cast secularism as a completely foreign doctrine imposed on the Islamic world by colonial powers.” Even “secular reformers” who appreciate Western secular democracies “opt for a state that reflects the importance and force of Islamic principles and values as they proceed to engage in wide ranging reformist thinking.”

Interestingly, for secularists, like Iraqi-born Faisal Saeed Al Mutar, founder of the Global Secular Humanist Movement, raised by a liberal Muslim family and now living in New York City, it’s actually strict secular Muslims who could truly understand the critical need for a separation of mosque and state. He said in an interview that he doesn’t agree with Carson’s edict and noted, “I would also argue that secular Muslims would make the best presidents on the topic of the First Amendment because they understand the most [that] the marriage between religion and politics is very poisonous.”

One of his Facebook friends responded: “Faisal Saeed Al Mutar for President.” Meanwhile, some of his Muslim critics have also called him a “heretic” and an “infidel,” not to mention “Uncle Tom” and “sellout.”


For a reality check on whether a Muslim, absent sweeping reform of Islamic doctrine, can truly be secular see Dr. Stephen M. Kirby’s series on Fantasy Islam:





Also see:

Irving Mayor: Ahmed Mohamed’s Family Blocking Release of Records; Obama Tweeted Support Even Before “Clock” Pic Released

2015-09-16T191047Z_1_LYNXNPEB8F158_RTROPTP_3_USA-TEXAS-STUDENTTown Hall, by Kyle Shideler, Sep. 22, 2015:

Last night, Irving Texas Mayor Beth Van Duyne revealed that the family of Ahmed Mohammed has repeatedly refused to meet with city officials, refused to released records exonerating police conduct, and that President Obama had tweeted about the case even before pictures of the so-called “clock” were publicly available.

Appearing on Glenn Beck’s The Blaze TV, Van Duyne noted how reporting on the interaction between Mohammed and police had been remarkably one-sided, in part because the Mohammed family refused to release records noting:

“As a juvenile, they can not release those records. The school district, a number of times, has asked the family, to release the records, so that you can have the balanced story out there. The family is ignoring the request from the ISD.”

Van Duyne told Beck it would “help to describe why it progressed as it did” if the records were available. “Nobody is going to walk in and say, ‘oh you’re a 14-year old child, you’re totally cooperating, we have all the answers we need, let’s arrest you,’” Van Duyne added.

A spokesperson for the Irving Police Department has said there have been multiple open records requests for the full police reporting, but that those requests remained in the hands of the city’s legal advisor. The available police report describes the event only as, “…Arrestee being in possession of a hoax bomb at MacArthur High School.”

Van Duyne said that according to the information she had seen, Mohammed had been “non-responsive” and “passive aggressive” in response to questions from police officers.

The refusal to amiably resolve the situation continued as the family rushed to bring Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) representatives into the case, and repeatedly cancelled meetings with the school district and city officials before finally speaking to the media.

“We had tried to reach out to the family a number of times; this was before it ever even hit the papers on Wednesday,” Van Duyne said pointing out that the family repeatedly canceled attempts to discuss the matter.

“At the exact same time they were supposed to be meeting with us, they were on their front lawn with a press conference,“ she said.

Van Duyne also pointed out that President Obama, like many others, had rushed to judgment before the facts in the case had become available.

“We never even got a call from anybody at the White House asking to verify any of that information. I don’t think the picture of the hoax bomb was even released before he tweeted ‘cool clock kid.’” Van Duyne said.
Van Duyne said she was “shocked” when she saw the President’s tweet to Ahmed Mohammed. “It seems to be an underlying habit that [President Obama] is going to second guess police officers without any kind of information.”

Van Duyne said that the Irving police chief, whom she called “a wonderful man”, was receiving death threats as a result of the case, as were other police officers, teachers and school administrators, in response to the controversy.

Van Duyne was joined on the Glenn Beck program by Jim Hanson, a former Special Forces Sergeant and Vice President of the Center for Security Policy, who pointed out CAIR’s documented ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and the terrorist group Hamas, and that the Mohammed family were members of a mosque tied to an Irving Sharia Tribunal which Mayor Van Duyne had publicly opposed.
“I don’t think there’s any question that this latest event was a PR stunt, it was a staged event,” Hanson said, saying the device did look like an explosive. “I’ve built briefcase bombs and blown them up, that’s what they look like,” Hanson pointed out referring to his time with Special Forces.

“They basically took a situation that the police handled properly, the school handled properly and all of a sudden everyone involved is a hater,” Hanson added.

Van Duyne also pointed out that the “teacher was reacting to the device not the student” stressing, “If something had happened, and nobody had spoken up, people would be livid. Can you imagine if you were a parent, at [Irving School District] and no one said anything?”


Judge Napolitano Argues Potential Fraud Case If Ahmed Mohamed’s Clock Was A ‘Purposeful Hoax’ (

Judge Andrew Napolitano told Megyn Kelly the saga of Ahmed Mohamed’s clock “now appears as though that this was a purposeful hoax.”

Napolitano, appearing on Fox News’s “The Kelly File” Monday, suggested that “if the parents were involved in the hoax, now you now have a fraud going on” because money has been collected on false pretenses. (WATCH: Professor Calls Ahmed Mohamed’s Clock A ‘Fraud’)

Napolitano continued, “if this was part of a purposeful stunt and if the parents were involved in this, and everybody from Mark Zuckerberg to President Obama fell for this, this is not good. This is people overreacting because of his last name, or his skin color, or the atmosphere of fear. We saw a clock, we assume it’s dangerous. The kid who made the clock, or brought it in, has a Muslim ancestry.  I wish race could be out of this but all of that goes aside if this was some sort of a purposeful stunt.”

Also see:

It Is CAIR’s History of Falsehood That Raises Clock Questions

d455913e-196d-4a67-9033-7e65be8d909cTown Hall, by Kyle Shideler, Sep. 18, 2015:

As the initial hubbub surrounding the story of Ahmed Mohammed and his “clock” is beginning to die down to a dull roar, it’s worth looking at where exactly the skepticism of his story arrives from.

Obviously, the young man, in his NASA T-Shirt and glasses cuts a sympathetic image. But the swift appearance on the scene of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), raises questions. If this was a misunderstanding and overzealous “Zero tolerance” police work, perhaps it has since been manipulated into something more.

In the case of Ahmed Mohammed, the introduction of CAIR into the equation suddenly pivoted the discussion from whether police exercised decent judgment, to accusations that all of the city of Irving, it’s school system, police, and government were islamophobes, and it was their Islamophobia, and not a beeping box filled with strange wires and circuits, that led police to Ahmed Mohammed.

It’s no surprise that an organization like CAIR would target Irving, since its Mayor, Beth Van Duyne, brought attention to an attempt by Muslim Brotherhood (MB) linked Imams to form a Shariah law tribunal in North Texas, and raised a ruckus by supporting the Constitution over the introduction of foreign law. One of the organizations linked to the tribunal runs the mosque attended by the Mohammed family.

Is it possible CAIR is attempting to use this controversy in order to target one of its political opponents? Judging from history, it seems likely.

The Council on American Islamic Relations was formed in response to a 1993 meeting in Philadelphia held by members of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, and took place under the watchful eye of the FBI.

CAIR has always been far more than the civil rights organization it purports to be. Indeed at that very meeting, the members of Hamas, including those who would found CAIR, discussed how they could manipulate civil rights in order to further their interests.

From the testimony of FBI agent Lara Burns discussing the propaganda effort to oppose the 1993 Peace Accord:

Q. Were there additional discussions making presentations to America on human rights?

A. Yes.

MR. JONAS: If we can go to Philly Meeting No. 10,

Segment G. That is on page 5 of the excerpted portion. If we can put that on the screen, please, the bottom segment.

Q. (BY MR. JONAS) What does this unidentified male say, please?

A. He says, “The first is to make the agreement fail, and this is a public policy and all of us are opposing it. It is the just the media which exaggerated the issue. Second, finding the alternatives. The first step should be taken advantage of by the brothers in — how to make the agreement fail. The national rights, human rights, stuff which will be exploited in order to make you look legitimate while you call on the annulment of the agreement. (Emphasis added)

Thusly CAIR and its antecedents in the Muslim Brotherhood are on record as feigning concerns about civil and human rights in order to achieve their ends.

Skepticism of CAIR and it’s feigned civil rights posture also appeared when federal prosecutors responded to a CAIR and Muslim American Society (MAS) Amici brief in the case United States V. Sabri Benkahla. In that case the prosecutors noted:

In describing themselves in Amici Brief at 1, CAIR and MAS omit reference to a shared background that limits their membership to those of a particular political bent, and undercuts their credibility. (Emphasis added)

The prosecutors go on to describe CAIR and MAS as Muslim Brotherhood entities which the federal government has shown engages in deception in order to further the interest of terrorist organizations.

Since CAIR was first outted by the Federal government for its role in deception operations on behalf of terrorism, CAIR has been caught up in numerous false hate crimes. As Professor Daniel Pipes noted in a 2005 article, CAIR has routinely, and knowingly, claimed as hate crimes events that either did not occur, or where the victim was in fact the perpetrator, such as claims of racist arson when the motive was in fact insurance fraud.

Perhaps most notorious was CAIR’s involvement in the 2006 “Flying Imams” case, where six imams returning from a conference of the North American Imam Federation (a group whose website publicly praises a MB leader Yusuf Al Qaradawi, who issued a 2004 fatwa calling for the death of Americans in Iraq), claimed they were unfairly ejected from a U.S. Airways flight for loudly praying.

As it turned out, those men were ejected from the flight not for prayers, but after passengers and airline employees reported that they had engaged in a number of suspicious behaviors involving swapping seats to take up those known to be favored by hijackers, seeking heavy metal seatbelt extenders which their size did not require, and other activities which even a Federal Air Marshal agreed were telltale signs of alarm.

CAIR intervened with a press conference and a lawsuit against the airline, the employees and even “John Doe passengers.” In that case the public rallied around the passengers, and congress passed a law protecting private travelers from lawsuits, when their good faith suspicions of terrorist activity led to security officials taking action.

Like the situation with the Flying Imams, CAIRs interjection into this case suggests that it is about much more than the intentions of a young man bringing an odd electronic device to school. One’s positions on zero tolerance policies in school are not the issue of debate.

The issue is CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood, and their efforts to keep those who “see something” that seems suspicious from “saying something.” That goes for teachers, airline passengers and mayors.


Video: A Closer Look at Ahmed’s Clock


Reverse Engineering Ahmed Mohamed’s Clock… and Ourselves 

For one last bit of confirmation, I located the pencil box Ahmed used for his project. During this video interview he again claims it was his “invention” and that he “made” the device – but the important thing at the moment, at 1:13, we see him showing the pencil box on his computer screen. Here it is on Amazon, where it’s clearly labeled as being 8.25 inches wide. Our eBay seller also conveniently took a photo of the clock next to a ruler to show it’s scale – about 8 inches wide. The dimensions all line up perfectly.

So there you have it folks, Ahmed Mohamad did not invent, nor build a clock. He took apart an existing clock, and transplanted the guts into a pencil box, and claimed it was his own creation. It all seems really fishy to me.

If we accept the story about “inventing” an alarm clock is made up, as I think I’ve made a pretty good case for, it’s fair to wonder what other parts of the story might be made up, not reported factually by the media, or at least, exaggerated.

I refer back again to this YouTube video interview with Ahmed. He explains that he closed up the box with a piece of cord because he didn’t want it to look suspicious. I’m curious, why would “looking suspicious” have even crossed his mind before this whole event unfolded, if he was truly showing off a hobby project, something so innocuous as an alarm clock. Why did he choose a pencil box, one that looks like a miniature briefcase no less, as an enclosure for a clock? It’s awful hard to see the clock with the case closed. On the other hand, with the case open, it’s awful dangerous to have an exposed power transformer sitting near the snooze button (unless, perhaps his invention was to stop serial-snooze-button pressers by giving them a dangerous electrical shock!)

So again, I’m pointing all this out – about the specifics of the clock – not to pick on the poor kid. I’m picking on us, our culture, and our media. I don’t even care about the clock itself at this point.

If we stop and think – was it really such a ridiculous reaction from the teacher and the police in the first place? How many school shootings and incidents of violence have we had, where we hear afterwards “this could have been prevented, if only we paid more attention to the signs!” Teachers are taught to be suspicious and vigilant. Ahmed wasn’t accused of making a bomb – he was accused of making a look-alike, a hoax. And be honest with yourself, a big red digital display with a bunch of loose wires in a brief-case looking box is awful like a Hollywood-style representation of a bomb. Everyone jumped to play the race and religion cards and try and paint the teachers and police as idiots and bigots, but in my mind, they were probably acting responsibly and erring on the side of caution to protect the rest of their students, just in case. “This wouldn’t have happened if Ahmed were white,” they say. We’re supposed to be sensitive to school violence, but apparently religious and racial sensitivity trumps that. At least we have another clue about how the sensitivity and moral outrage pecking order lies.

Because, is it possible, that maybe, just maybe, this was actually a hoax bomb? A silly prank that was taken the wrong way? That the media then ran with, and everyone else got carried away? Maybe there wasn’t even any racial or religious bias on the parts of the teachers and police.


Also see:

Alice Linahan and Frank Gaffney on Civilization Jihad and the Common Core

Alice Linahan is preparing to launch her book,”A Community’s Journey from #CANiSEE to I Can See”; a lecture series providing a comprehensive study of the 21st Century/Workforce Development/Common Core Take Over of Education.


In this video Alice Linahan and Frank Gaffney share critical facts about Civilization Jihad and the Common Core.

As defined in the book “Sharia, a Threat to America”- “Civilization jihad is a form of political and psychological warfare that includes multi-layered cultural subversion, the co-opting of senior leaders, influence operations, propaganda and other means of insinuating shariah gradually into Western societies.”

In the West a fundamental shift is beginning to be felt, as the American idea of individual freedom clashes with the political purpose of control and submission. The outcome will depend on if individuals refuse to submit.


ALICE LINAHAN, Vice President of Women on the Wall speaks with Frank Gaffney on Secure Freedom Radio November 24, 2014:

  • Effects of Obama’s Common Core curriculum on the U.S. education system
  • Controversy regarding Islamists penetrating the U.S. educational system and advancing Sharia ideology through Common Core
  • Looking at Arabic-immersion schools in Texas and around the U.S.

Also see:

Mississippi Jihadists Arrested, Tied to Muslim Brotherhood

3539211070Center for Security Policy, by Kyle Shideler, August 14, 2015:

Earlier this week, the media reported on the arrest of Jaelyn Delshaun Young, 20, and Muhammad Oda Dakhlalla, 22, a couple who was arrested by the FBI attempting to travel to Syria in support of the Islamic State. Media reports note that Dakhlalla’s father Oda Dakhlalla is the Imam of the Islamic Center of Mississippi, in Starksville. The Islamic Center of Mississippi (ICM) is connected to the Muslim Students Association (MSA) of Mississippi State University (MSU); the same university which Dakhlalla and Young attended. Funds for the building of the mosque were provided by the Islamic Society of North America, a Muslim Brotherhood group listed as an “unindicted co-conspirator or joint ventrurer” in the Holy Land Foundation terror finance trial. The Federal judge in the case, Jorge Solis, wrote in his memorandum opinion that the government provided “ample evidence” for associating ISNA with the terrorist group Hamas.

ICM was established in 1977, and their property resides just off the MSU campus. Interestingly, it appears that the MSA at MSU may be run by another of Dakhlalla’s relatives. The MSU MSA’s website lists its Secretary as Abdullah Dakhlalla, who appears to be the arrested suspect’s brother, and a Janna Watson Dakhlalla, the MSA President, who appears to be Abdullah’s wife, and thus Mohammed Dakhlalla’s sister-in-law.

The Muslim Students Association is the oldest organization of the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States. The establishment of ICM took place in absolutely textbook Muslim Brotherhood fashion, as described in an audiotape lecture by the General Masul of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood Executive Office Zaid Noman, which was submitted into evidence in the Holy Land Foundation case. Noman said:

The first change was moving the Ikhwans (Muslim Brothers) from working at the branches of the MSA and the [Arab Youth Muslim] Association as branches whose activities are based on universities where they go a university to hold their activity, to what is called at that time “The Muslim House”. The Muslim House was based on them purchasing a house near the university with Ikhwans living in a part of it and the rest of it becomes a mosque and it would also be a nucleus for the activity. This was the first move the Ikhwans did. After that, the other move came where this Muslim House was not a goal by itself or it was no longer able to satisfy work as they started to move to somewhere else which are the Islamic centers. We notice that during the past two or three years that many of the students’ gathering started to establish Islamic centers. This was also another healthy move for settling the Dawa’a as the presence of an Islamic center means the presence of residents, means the existence of contacts between students and the residents, means recruitment of the residents and winning them to the ranks of the dawa’a, means forming permanent foundations in these cities.

Later in the same lecture Noman discusses how the Muslim Brothers should engage in firearms training, and obliquely references the Muslim Brotherhood’s involvement in “military work.”

Additionally the role of MSAs in the indoctrination of individuals to engage in jihad has already been noted by law enforcement. The NYPD intelligence report “Radicalization in the West” described MSAs as potential “incubators” for terrorism:

Among the social networks of the local university population, there appears to be a growing trend of Salafi-based radicalization that has permeated some Muslim student associations (MSA’s). Extremists have used these university-based organizations as forums for the development and recruitment of likeminded individuals – providing a receptive platform for younger, American-born imams, to present a radical message in a way that resonates with the students.

Connections to Muslim Brotherhood-linked mosques were also been identified in the Chattanooga Shooting. In that incident, the shooter was closely associated with the Islamic Society of Greater Chattanooga (ISGC), whose deed is held by the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT). NAIT is a subsidiary of ISNA, the same organization which helped fund the Starksville, MI, mosque.

NAIT also holds the deed to the Islamic Community Center of Phoenix (ICCP), attended by the perpetrators of the the Garland, Texas attack. In the Garland case, the FBI has indicted Abdul Malik Abdul Kareem (AKA Decarus Thomas), who was also an ICCP attendee, for procuring and helping train the Garland shooters with firearms. In the Chattanooga case, investigators are looking into reports that the shooter conducted firearms training with other Muslim men, before committing the attack.

Establishing “Islamic Centers,” indoctrinating youth, training for jihad. Exactly as described in the Brotherhood’s own words.

Yet despite this growing pattern, media outlets are already preparing to “see no evil” when it comes to the role of the Muslim Brotherhood in indoctrinating young Muslims to engage in jihad. The Clarion-Ledger’s editorial warned “Terror Suspect Arrests Invite Ignorant Views,” which not only doubled down on the connection between ICM and the Muslim Students of MSU (the editorial describes Imam Dakhalla working closely  with the MSU’s Muslim Students Association), but preemptively accuses those who would raise the issue of bigotry even before anyone has publicly made the connection between the recently arrested Islamic State suspects and ICM and the Muslim Brotherhood-linked organizations.

The identification of such patterns based on evidence used to be called investigation.

Director James Comey has already expressed that the FBI is being overwhelmed by literally hundreds of cases of potential jihadists in the United States, and they will continue to be overwhelmed if they continue to only seek to interdict jihadists before they travel to Syria or conduct an attack, instead of targeting the underlying network of indoctrination, established by the Muslim Brotherhood in the 1960s and ’70s and which has been developing and expanding to the present day.

Also see: