CAIR’s Identity Crisis: Defending Civil Rights or the Palestinian (Hamas) Struggle?

cair exposedIPT News
August 11, 2014

During the 1990s, the Muslim Brotherhood created a support network in the United States to help Hamas politically and financially. It was called the Palestine Committee. According to documents seized by the FBI by some of the committee’s members, that committee included some prominent Muslim American political activists, and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) – perhaps the most influential Muslim American political group.

As the war between Israel and Hamas raged in Gaza during the past month, legacy members of the Palestine Committee – the Hamas support network – found themselves back in the fight for public hearts and minds, as this Investigative Project on Terrorism special report shows.

 

Click on the following links to see the documents shown in the video tying CAIR to the Palestine Committee:

  • “The object of the conspiracy was to support Hamas.” This comes from a prosecution response to CAIR’s brief trying to be removed from a list of unindicted co-conspirators in the Hamas-financing trial of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development.
  • 1994 Palestine Committee meeting agenda featuring CAIR as a Palestine Committee entity.
  • Internal Memo, “Islamic Action for Palestine,” about helping Hamas politically and financially. It was seized by the FBI among a trove of Palestine Committee records.
  • Transcripts from a 1993 Palestine Committee in Philadelphia secretly recorded by the FBI:

1. “We checked with the brothers and they said, ‘Let’s be the ones to say that we are a political entity…”

2. War is deception.

  • Palestine Committee phone list including Nihad Awad and Basman Elashi.
  • 2009 FBI letter explaining why it no longer engages in outreach communication with CAIR.
  • 2006 DOJ press release announcing Basman Elashi’s conviction for illegal business transactions with a terrorist.
  • Rasmieh Odeh indictment for naturalization fraud.

New York Times Censors Ad Decrying Islamist Censorship

by Steven Emerson
IPT News
June 5, 2014

Note: This article originally was published by the Daily Caller.

The New York Times has become complicit in a stealth jihad against free speech in the United States undertaken by Islamists and their sympathizers who masquerade as “civil rights” groups.

The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) recently bought a full-page advocacy adin the print edition of the Times. It discussed extensively the need for the media and government to directly address the reality that many acts of terrorism are rooted in radical Islam — as articulated by the terrorists themselves — and that Islamist groups attempt to deflect attention from radical Islam’s role.

A similar yet more concise version of the ad was scheduled to run on the NYT website the following day. However, something happened from one day to the next that caused the Times to demand that the IPT change the language immediately, or it would pull the ad.

Asked about the new demand, the Times replied: “In addition to being inundated with customer complaints. [sic] I have been asked for the immediate change by the publisher.”

The NYT ordered us to insert the word “radical” before the term “Islamist groups,” so that it read, “Stop the radical Islamist groups from undermining America’s security, liberty and free speech.”

An “Islamist” is not simply an individual who privately observes Islam as his faith. An Islamist is an individual who blurs the ideological lines between personal religion and the nation state — a boundary upheld as one of America’s founding principles and sustained in the First Amendment — to foster a governmental system that relies upon the supremacy of Islam.

“Islamic,” on the other hand, is an adjective that describes an idea or element derived from or inspired by Islam. Islamists promote an Islamic agenda, though some do it more subtly than others.

Groups like the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) are Islamist, hiding behind their Muslim faith and a veneer of “civil rights” as they seek to mainstream an agenda that elevates Islam above other faiths. Their agenda subjugates democracy and supports overseas terrorist groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah and various individuals such as Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader Yousef Qaradawi, who inspires suicide attacks and other forms of violence.

The NYT’s directive to add the word “radical” is a seemingly minor, nuanced change. But here’s why it matters: IPT’s ads hold Islamist groups like CAIR accountable for refusing to acknowledge what many terrorists themselves acknowledge — that their acts of violence were motivated by Islamic text.

That the publisher saw fit to order changes at such a late stage — after the ads had already been approved, purchased by the IPT, and were running on nytimes.com — and that the demands for change escalated so quickly is unusual.

We have to wonder who exactly exerted what kind of pressure.

We can only conclude that the same Islamist forces that the IPT devoted its full-page ad to discussing were at work again — abetted by media sympathizers — in this case, the publisher of the newspaper of record.

CAIR would probably have preferred that the Times shut down the digital ad altogether — as part of its longer-term campaign to paint the IPT as anti-Islam and Islamophobic, while portraying itself as moderate. In a letter to the Times about IPT’s ad, CAIR said, “[IPT's] new ad takes up this defamatory theme by bizarrely attacking the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation’s largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization, for rightly stating that ‘Islam is not the problem; extremism and violent extremism is the problem’ when it comes to terrorist attacks.”

The IPT never said Islam is the problem in its ads. IPT suggested that radical Islam is a problem, and that CAIR — and other Islamists like them — are a problem, for their unwillingness to call out other members of their own faith who use Islam to justify their atrocities. IPT’s print ad specifically lauded those Muslim voices who criticize Islamists. Our digital ad used the word “Islamists” rather than Muslims on purpose.

The very attempt to discuss the role of radical Islam in motivating terrorists spawned a campaign to shut the debate down.

America is not at war with Muslims or Islam. The U.S. remains a welcoming and tolerant nation – one in which Muslims are freer and more secure to practice their faith than anywhere else in the world.

The censorship of free speech by Islamist groups and their media apologists continues to prevent America from addressing the core threat of radical Islam. Recognizing reality is not an attack on Islam or Muslims. Those who say otherwise are the ones of whom we — and, particularly, those in the media such as the NYT — should be wary.

Steven Emerson is the Executive Director of The Investigative Project on Terrorism.

Guardian Copy Editor Brags About Joining Islamist Censorship Campaign

Investigative Project on Terrorism Posts Full Page NYT Ad on Radical Islamist Censorship

shariah_protest_APBreitbart, by FRANCES MARTEL:

The Investigative Project on Terrorism, a Washington, D.C., nonprofit research center dedicated to exposing the threat of violent extremist terror around the world, is launching a full-page advertisement in The New York Times warning against censorship by radical Islamist groups.

The ad, titled “Still here. Still free. But for how long?”, commemorates the opening of the National September 11 Memorial Museum and warns that “the threat from radical Islamist terrorists who killed thousands of innocent Americans on Sept. 11, 2001 is as real today as it was then, if not more so.” One major threat to the stability and freedom of the West, the ad warns, is the repeated attempts to censor those who wish to target radical Islam, and a campaign, according to the IPT, to eliminate the word “Islam” from discussions of radical Islamist terror.

“Islamist groups, masquerading as ‘civil rights’ groups, have embarked on a bullying campaign to censor the word ‘Islam’ when discussing Islamic terrorism,” the ad states, “And the media plays a key role in this deception by legitimizing these radical Islamic groups and not exposing them.”

According to IPT Executive Director and Founder Steven Emerson, the ad is meant to target both the alleged radicals attempting to censor Americans and the American officials that have tolerated the initiative. “Perhaps most chilling” about the censorship, Emerson notes in a statement, “is that the U.S. government and civic institutions at the highest levels are capitulating to their aggressive censorship campaign.”

Read the full ad hereOn its website, the IPT notes that the ad is a “call to action” to accurately target terrorist threats and combat the dangers of radical Islam, both internationally and on American soil. The ad is running in conjunction with the posting of a White House petition demanding an end to the Obama-era “policy of censoring free speech in discussing radical Islam,” as well as a campaign to involve the American people in the fight against terrorism by calling for contact with Congressional representatives demanding transparency in discussing the threats facing the United States from fundamentalists.

The Investigative Project on Terrorism regularly contributes to coverage of radical Islam at Breitbart News. Read their coverage here.

The New York Times: Making the world safe for terrorism

Blockbuster Interview With Steven Emerson on the Glazov Gang

download (21)Front Page:

Steven Emerson recounts his career as a journalist from its beginnings in 1978 through the beginning of his focus on radical Islamic groups in the US after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. The accumulation of massive amounts of data which resulted from research for his first documentary “Jihad in America”  led to the creation of the Investigative Project on Terrorism in 1995. His organization has become the world’s largest archival data center on radical Islam. As an investigative agency, Emerson says, “We are not a think tank, we are a “do tank”.

 

In this second video Emerson talks about CAIR and much more. He does not mince words and there are some explosive comments like “Eric Holder is a hit man and a thug and corrupt…and should be indicted. Information on his corruption will be coming out in the next few months and it will be pretty shocking”

 

You can follow Steve Emerson on twitter @TheIPT where he engages members of CAIR and others, lately using CAIR’s #LegislatingFear to rain on their parade.

 

Judge Ends Imam’s Lawsuit Triggered by IPT Report

IPT News,
June 25, 2013:

Steve Emerson: I stand by my film

‘The Grand Deception’ was well-researched, using sources that included faithful Muslims and the FBI. Instead of addressing facts, CAIR chose to attack me personally.

by Steven Emerson
Orange County Register
February 16, 2013

Beware of ‘Pallywood’ Magic

IPT News:

Video: Christie Says “Bigots” Attacking Him on Radical Islam

by RYAN MAURO

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, often described as a “rock star” in the Republican Party, has finally addressed the criticism of his courtship of Islamists. On July 24, Christie held an Iftar dinner at the Governor’s Mansion, attended by Imam Mohammad Qatanani, a Hamas-linked cleric whose deportation is sought by the Department of Homeland Security. Christie reiterated his support for Qatanani and made the case to his Muslim audience that he is their ally by ridiculing the “bigots” attacking him.

Christie opens by talking about the attacks on “our relationship” (between him and, as he would characterize it, the Muslim community of N.J.) that show a “gaze of intolerance that’s going around our country that is disturbing.” You can watch the entire speech on YouTube.

Ramadan Iftar at Governor Christie’s Mansion 7/24/2012:

He mocked his critics, saying “You’ll all be fascinated to learn that in many publications around the country, I’m called an Islamist.” No one ever said he is an Islamist himself and only a handful of writers have covered the controversy, including myself,, the Investigative Project on TerrorismDr. Daniel PipesRobert Spencer and my fellow N.J. resident, Andrew McCarthy.

Christie blatantly accused us of having anti-Muslim motivations.

“These are the kind of red herrings that people put up who are bigots, who want to judge people based upon their religious beliefs, want to judge people with a broad brush,” he said.

He stood by his support for Imam Qatanani, pointing out that he was in attendance and “I’m glad to have you here.” He called him a “friend” that “has attempted to be a force for good in his community.”

To prove to his audience that he is their ally against “Islamophobia,” though he didn’t use that exact word, he cited the controversies surrounding three of his actions: His support for Qatanani, his nomination of Sohail Mohammed as a Superior Court Judge and how he stood against the NYPD’s intelligence-gathering operations in his state. Let’s address these cases one-by-one.

Imam Mohammad Qatanani

The story begins in 1993. The Israelis detained Qatanani for three months because they believed he was working with the Hamas terrorist group, partially because his brother-in-law was a Hamas leader in the West Bank. He told the Israelis that he had been a member of the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood but left in 1991 because of time constraints, not over any ideological split. He admitted to being a member of Hamas as part of a plea bargain and was released.

Qatanani came to N.J. in 1994 to serve as an imam for the Islamic Center of Passaic County (ICPC) in Paterson. The mosque was founded in 1989 by Mohammed el-Mezain, who later was convicted of being a Hamas fundraiser. It was in this mosque that el-Mezain boasted of having raised nearly $2 million in the U.S. for Hamas. Qatanani served alongside el-Mezain, even sharing the same address, until el-Mezain handed the reigns over to him.

Another extremist ICPC official was Esam Omeish, who once was the chairman of the board. He is the former president of the Muslim American Society, a Muslim Brotherhood front. Omeish calls the Brotherhood “moderate” and has expressed admiration for the founder of Hamas and Palestinians who believe “that the jihad way is the way to liberate your land.”

ICPC had Abdelhaleem Ashqar as a guest speaker, who was accused of being involved with Hamas and was later convicted for refusing to testify about the terrorist group’s fundraising. Another guest speaker at ICPC is Hamas-supporter Imam Reda Shata. When he was the leader of Brooklyn’s Islamic Center of Bay Ridge, he had El-Mezain as a guest speaker. The NYPD put Shata under surveillance as a “Tier One Person of Interest.”

In 1999, Qatanani applied for a green card and did not disclose his conviction by the Israelis as a member of Hamas. The Department of Homeland Security began seeking his deportation in July 2006. A 2008 court filing by the DHS accuses him of “material misrepresentation” and “engaging in unauthorized employment…by allowing an out-of-status alien to reside with him.” It also states that he “has engaged in terrorist activity.” Qatanani sent thousands of dollars to the West Bank and the DHS described his explanation that it was easier than a wire transfer to be “highly dubious.”

“It is certainly suspicious when a person who has been convicted of being a member of, and providing services, to Hamas, who has personal ties to a Hamas militant leader, and a Hamas fundraiser also sends undisclosed cash to the West Bank,” the filing states.

The Investigative Project on Terrorism translated some of his sermons between 2007 and 2009 that show the radicalism he preaches. Here are some highlights:

  • 2007: He prayed that Allah will help “our brothers and sisters in Philistine [Palestine] and Iraq and Chechnya” to “remove occupation and oppression.” The enemy “occupiers” are Israel, the U.S. and Russia.
  • June 2007: He teaches that Christians and Jews “will be swiftly punished” with “the hypocrites [who] are in the lower pits of hellfire.”
  • November 2007: He instructs Muslims not to talk bad about fellow Muslims, using Sheikh Yousef al-Qaradawi as an example. Qaradawi is the top Muslim Brotherhood cleric who vocally supports Hamas and suicide bombings.
  • January 2008: “You see now that you should do jihad or struggle, to change evil-doing…You know, I mention in so many times that jihad is greater than fighting. It is not only fighting. And you cannot just contain it in fighting.”
  • May 2009: He prays that Allah will release the imprisoned officials of the Holy Land Foundation, who were locked up for financing Hamas. He said that they were the victim of a “political judgment” and that the U.S. government is persecuting the Council on American-Islamic Relations and the Islamic Society of North America by labeling them as “unindicted co-conspirators” in the trial.

 

Qatanani was booked as a speaker on June 24 at Dar al-Hijrah, an extremely radical mosque tied to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood and frequented by Al-Qaeda operatives.

So, how did Christie, then U.S. Attorney, react to the DHS’ efforts to deport Qatanani?

He sent his Assistant U.S. Attorney Charles McKenna to testify as a character witness on his behalf. In September 2008, Christie went to the ICPC to praise Qatanani as a “man of great goodwill.”

After becoming Governor, Christie appointed McKenna as his director of the N.J. Office of Homeland Security, a post he held until February. In July 2008, the office McKenna would later lead actually produced a report about Hamas networks in the state that contradicted McKenna’s assessment of Qatanani. The imam’s name was the only one to be mentioned in it.

The day after Christie’s endorsement, the immigration judge ruled in favor of Qatanani, granting him permanent residency and dismissing Israel’s evidence against him. The Board of Immigration Appeals overturned it, deciding that the Israeli evidence was “properly authenticated and that there was no adequate basis for the immigration judge to give them ‘very low evidentiary weight.'”  The Israelis provided three documents: A letter from their liaison and the military court’s verdict and indictment. The DHS points out that Qatanani never said he was forced into confessing that he was a member of Hamas and admitted that he underwent a trial process in Israeli custody, proving that he knew he was convicted when he filed his green card.

The deportation hearing continues November 26 and Christie is standing by him.

Sohail Mohammed

In his Ramadan dinner speech, Christie boasted of nominating attorney Sohail Mohammed as a Superior Court Judge and blasted the “hysteria” surrounding his decision and “all the nonsense and all this business about Sharia Law.”

Mohammed was the General Counsel of the American Muslim Union, which has had at least five common officials with the Hamas-founded ICPC. The organization’s newsletter stated that “Zionist commandos orchestrated the 9/11 terrorist attacks” and supports Neturei Karta, a pro-Hamas, pro-Ahmadinejad Jewish group dedicated to the destruction of Israel. The group also declined to participate in the 2005 “Free Muslims March Against Terror,” which condemned all terrorist groups, including Hamas.

Mohammed also spoke out against the prosecutions of Sami al-Arian, a convicted leader of Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Holy Land Foundation. The evidence against them was enormous. He dismissed it and is now a Superior Court Judge, thanks to Christie.

When the controversy first broke, Christie reacted with: “This Sharia Law business is crap. It’s just crazy. And I’m tired of dealing with the crazies. I mean, you know, it’s just unnecessary to be accusing this guy of things just because of his religious background.”

In his speech on July 24, Christie said he had known Mohammed for years. What he didn’t say is how he knew him.

Mohammed was Qatanani’s attorney.

 
Read more: Family Security Matters

Ryan Mauro is Family Security Matters’ national security analyst. He is a fellow with RadicalIslam.org, the founder of WorldThreats.com and a frequent national security analyst for Fox News Channel. He can be contacted at ryanmauro1986@gmail.com.


Michael Coren interviews Steve Emerson on the Muslim Brotherhood and Stealth Jihad

By Steve Emerson, IPT:

MICHAEL COREN: Steve Emerson is one of North America’s most eminent and respected commentators. He is the author of six books and his television documentary, if you haven’t seen it, you have to, “Jihad in America” won the 1994 George Polk award for best TV documentary. Very early to have covered this sort of stuff. And top prize for the best investigative reporting from Investigative Reporters and Editors. He is also the executive director of The Investigative Project on Terrorism and he frequently testifies before Congressional committees and other related organizations. A great pleasure to welcome you back on the show. How are you?

STEVEN EMERSON: Hard to answer that question. I have become a dysfunctional workaholic, working 14 hours a day, but that is normal in DC.  And the only problem is that I am reading emails until four in the morning and it gets me so stressed out that I don’t sleep till six. I’m fine, thanks.

COREN: I will take that as a, yeah, very well, thanks very much. I know because I’ve had some of the emails back from you in the middle of the night. I don’t know when you actually do sleep. Of course those who plot against us don’t sleep very much either. The real problem for me at least is not that the Muslim Brotherhood and other groups are organizing; it is that so few people in the west seem to understand it and are willing to stand up and fight back.

EMERSON: Well, it is not just willing. There is cognitive dissonance or witting collaboration. There are various motivations. They range from naiveté to our belief that if we don’t lie, others don’t lie. But the reality is that the Muslim Brotherhood is a fascist group and it is based on fascist principals founded in 1928. And even the presidential candidate Morsi, who just won; two hours before President Obama called him to congratulate him for transitioning to democracy, he stated in a speech in Cairo that the shariah will run Egypt from now on. The shariah implements second class codification for women, allows the beating of wives, allows the stoning of women, killing of apostates. And this obviously is going to cause major problems of persecution and even murder of Christians and other minorities in Egypt. Number two, in the United States and in Europe there is an equal problem, that the Muslim Brotherhood front groups, and there are many, and this was documented by the FBI in a raid in 2004 where they found a treasure trove of internal MB documents. There is a whole [Muslim Brotherhood ]structure in the United States and yet this Administration is dealing only with those [very same MB ] groups that believe that there is a “war against Islam”, that Israel should be destroyed, that  support [or rationalize] suicide bombings;  and [moreover, this Administration won't]… don’t deal with the genuine moderate Muslims who are so courageous because they know they will get shot at when they stick their necks out of the foxhole.

COREN: The question is why because this is abundantly true. We know there are moderate Muslims, probably not as well organized, in fact certainly not as well organized, but they are crying out to be heard and they are being rejected, dismissed, by the very people that they want to help.

EMERSON: Well first of all you are right, they are not as well organized and the Saudi charities and the Islamic billion dollar charities in Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf don’t go to American Muslims for Peace Now, they go to the Muslim Brotherhood groups. In fact, the Muslim Brotherhood groups get the lion’s share of the Saudi moneys, of the Persian Gulf moneys and now they are so well endowed that they have a monopoly, not just in the Middle East, on the education system, on the media system, on the religious system but they have a monopoly here in the United States as well. And you are right. When there was just a hearing the other day by the House Committee on Homeland Security, Democrat after Democrat dissed and made outrageous insults against the three moderate Muslims who courageously testified and [who] admitted there is a problem within Islam that they want to correct; …that [stated is imperative]…  to admit that radical Islam does exist, it doesn’t mean that all Muslims are terrorists, but the [prohibition] of even uttering the term “radical Islam” is part of the edict issued by this administration.

COREN: For those out there who say well I know Muslims and they are nice people, we are not attacking Muslims. If we look at the Russian revolution, the Bolsheviks never represented more than maybe 10% at most of the population, but they controlled an entire empire eventually. The Muslim Brotherhood speaks for more than 10%. They are heavily organized, they have been working for generations now, they now have Egypt, they could well have Syria by the end of the year. This is very worrying.

EMERSON: They could have Syria, they could have Libya. Ultimately they could have Iraq. There is already a different variety [of radical Islam] that controls Iran. Look, there is another problem here. The Muslim Brotherhood is not a democratic system. We equate democracy with civil society so when we allowed elections in Gaza, they elected Hamas, a terrorist government. Democracy didn’t moderate them. The notion that we believe that direct elections and democracy are going to moderate the Muslim Brotherhood is absolutely insane. The reality is totally different. They are deceptive. They use deception. We [the Investigative Project on Terrorism] publish all the time, and so does MEMRI.org, all of their radical statements, but no one takes them seriously and then we buy into the naiveté. In the United States, the Muslim Brotherhood infrastructure has a monopoly on the Islamic communities. Most Muslims, I don’t believe, support the radical ideas of the Muslim Brotherhood, but the Muslim Brotherhood groups themselves control the leadership of the organizations. They have infiltrated, and I am not being conspiratorial, they have penetrated the media; they have penetrated law enforcement and I can document that. In fact, [if I may],  just a plug,  [we have] a new documentary coming out in September is called “Jihad in America: Grand Deception” and it is about the stealth Jihad. That means it is about the Jihad waged legally in terms of infiltrating what they [the Muslim Brotherhood in their own documents obtained by the FBI] call a “civilizational Jihad process.” That is a quote used from an internal MB document in the U.S.

COREN: Steve, we will have to have you back on the show. In fact, I promise we will have you back on the show. Thank you so very much indeed.

EMERSON: You’re very welcome.

Must Watch Video!: Steve Emerson interview on Stealth Jihad in America

Steve Emerson of The Investigative Project on Terrorism talks about what the media won’t: Jihad in America:

Steve Emerson has been investigating the threat of Islamic jihad since 1992 and tried to warn us about the threat before 9/11. Emerson first gained national attention with his 1994 PBS documentary Jihad in America, which argued that Islamic militants, supported by prominent Arab- American and Muslim groups, were exploiting constitutionally protected civil liberties to train and organize and to plot acts of terror. The new documentery coming out soon will no doubt be a blockbuster.