CPAC Turns Away Pamela Geller #STANDWITHPAMELAGELLER

pam-gellerby Breitbart News: For the last four years, Pamela Geller of AtlasShrugs.com and the American Freedom Defense Initiative have held events at CPAC featuring guests she invites to discuss the influence of Islamism on America. But this year, the American Conservative Union (ACU) has no room for Geller or her message.

In 2009, she brought Geert Wilders, who is the head of the third largest party in the Netherlands and has spoken out against the Islamization of his country.

In 2010 she held an event that her organization, The American Freedom Defense Initiative, hosted, titled “Jihad: The Political Third Rail”, with speakers like Allen West, Wafa Sultan, Simon Deng, Anders Gravers, and Steve Coughlin.

In 2011, she hosted an event discussing the Ground Zero Mosque with 9/11 families. In 2012, the event was titled “Islamic Law in America.”

More at Breitbart

via #STANDWITHPAMELAGELLER

Huge thanks to Michelle Malkin, who took to twitter and really stepped up to support me in the wake of the Breitbart article: “CPAC Turns Away Pamela Geller”. Joining Malkin are Mark Levin, The Right ScoopMaggie’s NotebookRobert SpencerInstapunditDonald Douglas, Theo Spark, Patrick over at T&RLucianne,IOTWTim at Freedom PostMarooned in Marin, and many others.

Every year I organize a critical event covering issues CPAC won’t touch, like jihad and sharia. Grover Norquist and Suhail Khan wield enormous influence and have kept Robert Spencer and me and so many of our colleagues off the CPAC schedule for years.

“Michelle Malkin, others #StandWithPamelaGeller after CPAC snub” March 2, 2013 by Twitchy Staff

However edifying this year’s CPAC gathering will be for attendees, its organizers have provided plenty of entertainment value to the public in the run-up to the event. Who will appear — Mitt RomneySarah Palin, and Dr. Ben Carson, for example — hasn’t caused as much of a stir as who won’t be in attendance. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie wasn’t invitedGOProud has been excluded, and today Pamela Geller of the American Freedom Defense Initiative announced that her application to speak has been ignored.

Check out all these tweets. If you are on twitter, please use the hashtags #standwithpamelageller and #CPAC and #CPAC2013.

Read the rest at Atlas Shrugs

6a00d8341c60bf53ef017d416ee9f0970c-600wi

Suhail Khan, A Case Study In Influence Operations:

 

Organizations Grover Norquist is Using To Subvert The Right:

 

Grover Norquist’s Ongoing Influence Operation:

Related articles

The Blaze Documentary: “The Project”

project

In 2001, an inconspicuous manifesto now known as “The Project” was recovered during a raid in Switzerland: A manifesto that turned out to be a Muslim road map for infiltrating and defeating the West. Today, files containing evidence from the largest terror financing trial in U.S. history, which include details about “The Project”, are being withheld by the Department of Justice.

In an explosive two-part mini-series, The Blaze documentary unit investigates how the Muslim Brotherhood has infiltrated the American government and exposes how our nation’s safety is in jeopardy as a result of this dangerous government cover up.

The Project parts 1-2, FULL video:

Gulen’s False Choice: Silence or Violence

Fethullah Gulen

By Stephen Schwartz:

The imam and his army should follow their own advice: respond to insults against Muhammad or other non-violent attacks by presenting a better example of Islam, rather than by attempting prior restraint on free expression.

When the enigmatic Turkish Islamist leader, M. Fethullah Gulen, who lives in the U.S., published, in the September 27 London Financial Times, an op-ed column with a clumsy turn from benevolent moderation to hard Islamist ambitions, he revealed his authentic character.

The topic was, probably predictably, the latest outburst of terrorism in Muslim countries, along with the pretext of indignation against a crude video made in the U.S. and which insulted Muhammad. The op-ed, entitled, “Violence is not in the tradition of the Prophet,” emphasized, in the first seven (out of nine) paragraphs, that Muslims should not react to insults against Muhammad by destructive protests: “The violent response,” he wrote, “was wrong… Muslims …must speak out [against] violence… The question we should ask ourselves as Muslims is whether we have introduced Islam and its Prophet properly to the world. Have we followed his example in such a way as to instill admiration?… [A Muslim] should respect the sacred values of Christians, Jews, Buddhists and others as he expects his own religion and values to be respected.” So far, so good.

The true outlook of Fethullah Gulen, however, was revealed in his last two paragraphs: “Hate speech designed to incite violence is an abuse of the freedom of expression… [W]e should appeal to the relevant international institutions, such as the Organization of Islamic Cooperation [OIC] or the UN, to intervene, expose and condemn instances of hate speech. We can do whatever it takes within the law to prevent any disrespect to all revered religious figure, not only to the Prophet Muhammad. The attacks on the Prophet we have repeatedly experienced are to be condemned, but the correct response is not violence. Instead, we must pursue a relentless campaign to promote respect for the sacred values of all religions,” Gulen proclaimed.

Gulen proposes, in so many words, adoption of international laws against blasphemy as an alternative to homicidal outbursts. And what would a “relentless campaign” involve other than disrespect for free speech? Presenting terrorist mobs and blasphemy codes as the principal alternatives for redress of offended Muslims’ grievances is hardly reasonable, and conflicts with the reputation Gulen has sought to construct for himself and his followers as dedicated adherents to interfaith dialogue and tolerance of religious differences.

Gulen leads a massive, worldwide religious, journalistic, and educational network, known as Hizmet (Service). His movement is associated with the Istanbul daily newspaper Zaman (Time), which claims to be Turkey’s largest in circulation. Zaman produces an English online edition, Today’s Zaman, as well as media aimed at the overseas Turkish communities in Germany and Australia. Zaman also appears in locally-edited versions in countries, from the Balkans to Kyrgyzia, which possess either Turkish minorities, or are viewed as part of a pan-Turkish cultural sphere. Zaman has no problem with restrictive press rules under notorious dictatorships, such as, for example, that of the former Soviet Muslim republic of Turkmenistan, under the eccentric, coercive, and energy-rich regime established by its post-Communist autocrat, Suparmarat Niyazov (1940-2006). Zaman Turkmenistan, following the prevailing rules, has refrained from reporting news unfavorable to Niyazov’s regime and its successors.

Gulen is doubtless best known outside Turkey for a system of science-oriented primary, secondary, and higher education institutions across the globe, including many operated as “charter schools,” with local public financing, in the U.S. The Gulen school system in America – 120 establishments in 2012, according to The New York Times – has been questioned for its odd characteristics. These include recruiting American students of non-Turkish descent to learn Turkish – hardly a likely first choice for American learners of a second language – and participating in competitions for the mastery of Turkish culture. Turkish-Americans, however, according to the reliable estimates, account for fewer than 150,000 people out of the total population, thereby depriving the Gulen program of an argument for multicultural representation in public school curricula of a significant minority culture.

Further, in the last two years, mainstream media have reported U.S. federal and state investigations of the Gulen charter school system. These have focused on charges of diversion of local government money to Gulen-controlled businesses and abuse of “H1B” work visas for teachers brought from Turkey and Central Asia who have substandard qualifications, while American teachers with superior credentials suffer unemployment. Earlier this year, The New York Times reported that three Gulen schools in the American state of Georgia (he has many more schools in the former Soviet republic of Georgia) had defaulted on bonds, and that an audit had disclosed improper contracting for services with Gulen enterprises.

The Gulen movement’s American branches additionally offer speaking platforms and tours of Turkey to influential Americans, with considerable success. Gulen, who began his professional life as an imam, has enjoyed the support of America’s premier academic apologist for radical Islam, Professor John Louis Esposito of the Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University, as well as other prominent figures. Through them, he has projected himself as a preacher of moderate, spiritual Islam related to the Sufi tradition and particularly to that of Said Nursi (1878-1960), who advocated a fusion of science and faith. Gulen has been especially identified by his defenders with mutual respect between religions and as an advocate for secular education, an opponent of terrorism, and, in effect, a lover of all humanity.

Inside Turkey, Gulen and his movement have a different image. They inspire considerable fear. Gulen’s followers have been accused of an elaborate strategy of infiltration of state institutions, including the army, police, and judiciary. Ahmet Sik, a Turkish journalist who wrote an expose of the movement, The Imam’s Army, was charged with participation in a nebulous “conspiracy” called “Ergenekon,” organized ostensibly by a “deep state” within the Turkish institutions. Sik was released in March 2012 after more than a year in prison. The Imam’s Army is banned in Turkey and has yet to be printed as a book there, although it, and excerpts translated into English, have been posted on the internet.

Read more at Gatestone Institute

Infiltration, Treason, Jihad – Welcome to The Project

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton:

The Blaze aired a special last week in two parts called The Project. Part 1 is here and Part 2 is here.

As I have contended from the very beginning, Obama and his minions are corrupt beyond belief. It is my belief that Obama is actively facilitating the Muslim Brotherhood and radical Islam in an effort to bring America to her knees and usher in not only Sharia law, but a worldwide caliphate. This week, I am going to summarize for you the content of The Project and what it means to Americans. Time is growing short, we are entering the third and final phase of a very, very evil plan.

In 2001, an Islamic manifesto called The Project was discovered in Switzerland. This document is a plan to carry out a quiet coup within the United States through indoctrination, subversion and infiltration at all levels of our government and through key positions in education and other influential positions such as the media. Fast forward to 2008 and the Holyland Foundation Trial. This showcased the largest terror financing trial in US history. There are 80 boxes of evidence, including The Project, that have been made available by our government to the accused enemies of America, but which, to this day, are being withheld from our leaders and the American people. Barack Obama, Eric Holder and Janet Napolitano cite national security, but have given the terrorists a free pass to review the documents. I contend, that if they haven’t already done so, that Obama and his colleagues will destroy those documents because they implicate Obama and his administration in outright treason by aiding and abetting the Muslim Brotherhood. If Obama loses this election, he will most likely do two things: 1) He will release the Blind Sheik and 2) he will have those 80 boxes of documents destroyed if he hasn’t done so already. Obama will remain faithful to his Muslim roots and his anti-colonialist leanings. Remember Obama’s words:

The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.

Radical Islamists have waged a silent propaganda and indoctrination war here in the US for many years and they have been winning over the hearts, minds and souls of many. They now are trying to basically do away with our First Amendment rights by criminalizing any form of speech that is deemed offensive to Islam. They have put themselves in place in our government and managed to purge all government documentation and libraries of any reference that criticizes Islam or that they find objectionable – i.e. blasphemy. They have even gotten into school textbooks glorifying Islam and rewriting our history in their favor. Hillary Clinton and the rest of the Islamic gang, are working towards United Nations Resolution 16/18 which prohibits “discrimination based on religion or belief.” That is an anti-blasphemy resolution and if passed by our senate, the end of the First Amendment.

From Diana West:

Here’s the secret that blasphemy laws are written to smother: Regarding the fundamentals of freedom of conscience, the autonomy of the individual, protection of children and equality of women, Islamic and Western doctrines have nothing in common and are, in fact, at irreconcilable, dagger’s-point odds. Silence – Shariah blasphemy laws – is the Obama-Clinton-OIC Islamic answer. Indeed, in the Shariah-compliant end, silence will replace the questions, too.

But we’re already used to it. Don’t believe me? Afshin Ellian, an Iranian-born Dutch law professor, poet and columnist, puts it this way: “If you cannot say that Islam is a backward religion and that Muhammad is a criminal, then you are living in an Islamic country, my friend, because there you also cannot say such things. I may say Christ was a homosexual and Mary was a prostitute, but apparently I should stay off of Muhammad.”

Obama has thrown the doors of our hallowed halls open to the Muslim Brotherhood. He meets with them every chance he gets, while snubbing Netanyahu and Israel – buying time for Iran to wipe them from the face of the earth with a nuke or 12. Our elected officials demanded a halt to the 1 billion slated for Egypt and funding for Libya after our embassies and consulates were attacked and an ambassador and others were murdered. Even after this horrendous event, where Obama, Rice and Clinton all lied about the cause of the terrorism, Obama turned around and is attempting to give $450 million to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and another $50+ million to Syrian rebels. So far, a few brave individuals in the House and Senate have stopped this, but I expect Obama to circumvent their efforts and send the money to our enemies anyway. It’s for his homies, don’t ya know.

The infiltration into America is on a par with Communism’s and in fact, they have linked forces to overthrow us from within. The Progressives and the Jihadists are working together to transform America. Each believes that in the end they will win and then get rid of the other. But that is after they have destroyed our Constitutional Republic. This is a war we could lose without ever being attacked – ravaged by the enemies within.

From The Blaze, here is a section of The Project:

This report presents a global vision of a worldwide strategy for Islamic policy [or "political Islam"]. Local Islamic policies will be drawn up in the different regions in accordance with its guidelines. It acts, first of all, to define the points of departure of that policy, then to set up the components and the most important procedures linked to each point of departure; finally we suggest several missions, by way of example only, may Allah protect us.

The following are the principal points of departure of this policy:

Point of Departure 1: To know the terrain and adopt a scientific methodology for its planning and execution.

Point of Departure 2: To demonstrate proof of the serious nature of the work.

Point of Departure 3: To reconcile international engagement with flexibility at a local level.

Point of Departure 4: To reconcile political engagement and the necessity of avoiding isolation on one hand, with permanent education and institutional action on the other.

Point of Departure 5: To be used to establish an Islamic State; parallel, progressive efforts targeted at controlling the local centers of power through institutional action.

Point of Departure 6: To work with loyalty alongside Islamic groups and institutions in multiple areas to agree on common ground, in order to “cooperate on the points of agreement and set aside the points of disagreement”.

Point of Departure 7: To accept the principle of temporary cooperation between Islamic movements and nationalist movements in the broad sphere and on common ground such as the struggle against colonialism, preaching and the Jewish state, without however having to form alliances. This will require, on the other hand, limited contacts between certain leaders, on a case by case basis, as long as these contacts do not violate the [shari’a] law. Nevertheless, one must not give them allegiance or take them into confidence, bearing in mind that the Islamic movement must be the origin of the initiatives and orientations taken.

Point of Departure 8: To master the art of the possible on a temporary basis without abusing the basic principles, bearing in mind that Allah’s teachings always apply. One must order the suitable and forbid that which is not, always providing a documented opinion. But we should not look for confrontation with our adversaries, at the local or the global scale, which would be disproportionate and could lead to attacks against the dawa or its disciples.

Point of Departure 9: To construct a permanent force of the Islamic dawa and support movements engaged in jihad across the Muslim world, to varying degrees and insofar as possible.

Point of Departure 10: To use diverse and varied surveillance systems, in several places, to gather information and adopt a single effective warning system serving the worldwide Islamic movement. In fact, surveillance, policy decisions and effective communications complement each other.

Point of Departure 11: To adopt the Palestinian cause as part of a worldwide Islamic plan, with the policy plan and by means of jihad, since it acts as the keystone of the renaissance of the Arab world today.

Point of Departure 12: To know how to turn to self-criticism and permanent evaluation of worldwide Islamic policy and its objectives, of its content and its procedures, in order to improve it. This is a duty and a necessity according to the precepts of shari’a.

 

Go to New Zeal to finish the article and watch the 11 minute Glenn Beck video at the end of the article. Steve Coughlin, Patrick Poole, Erick Stakelbeck, Joe Shmitz, and Robert Reilly discuss the extent and seriousness of the Muslim Brotherhood infiltration in America.

The global subversive fiasco

By Kerry Patton:

By now, people realize that something very mysterious is taking place globally. That something isn’t just a default caused by elected officials—inept protectors.  No.  It is a very complex unseen phenomenon called subversion.  And, it’s happening right before our very eyes.

Earlier in the week, it was noted that Spain could be on the brink of a civil war. Many Spaniards protested claims made in the article and even more claimed I knew nothing of which I was speaking.  Maybe I don’t but that is subjective and truth be told, I admit I know very little about the geo-political atmospherics taking place in places like Spain.

But, I do know how subversive activities work through years of studying and operating against aggressive and incredibly threatening agents who have done everything to destroy not only the United States but our allies across the globe.

What I do know is the fact that a global series of protests have unfolded over the past year. How did these protests come together? What sparked hundreds of thousands of persons around the globe to actually take to the streets in protest? What were they actually protesting about? Do they even know why they were protesting?

This is how subversion, or what my very good friend Kent Clizbe calls in his book Willing Accomplices as covert influence, works—something the Russians have mastered. Subversion is very active yet striking persons in an incredibly passive, almost nonchalant, way. Again, you cannot feel the activity, taste it, touch it, or smell it—you can only be conditioned to it.

Many living in this world have embraced a very unique subversive action meant to overthrow current nation states. But these passive players often have no clue what or who is truly behind the ordeal nor do they truly understand why they truly are participating in activities they would normally have nothing to do with.

When grass roots initiatives blossom into large scale global endeavors, it is easy to infiltrate institutions along with social or political systems. The Muslim Brotherhood is doing this every day as we speak and we know this due to their document of infiltration operations known as The project.

But others have sought to infiltrate institutions and have succeeded long before the Muslim Brotherhood had. The Communist party spread throughout the world and infiltrated virtually every global institution known.

But infiltrating an institution is only part of the subversive game. Remember the Russian Spy network which Anna Chapman was part of? Their entire intent was to infiltrate powerful institutions like the US government and our media. Once they infiltrated and got the ear of some high ranking persons, they would socially condition those assets who would later embrace a threatening ideology.

Read more at Canada Free Press

Kerry Patton, a combat disabled veteran, is the author of Sociocultural Intelligence: The New Discipline of Intelligence Studies and the children’s book American Patriotism. You can follow him on Facebook or at kerry-patton.com/.

 

Blaze TV’s Chilling Documentary “The Project” – summary and video clips

There are multiple ways to access “The Project.” This chilling documentary can be viewed ON DEMAND at TheBlazeTV or now on DISH channel 212.

‘The Project’ Part I — All Totalitarian Ideologies Are Threat to U.S.:

Is there a government cover-up at play?

A 2001 raid in Switzerland unearthed a chilling manifesto now dubbed “The Project,” a detailed Islamic blueprint for infiltrating, subverting and ultimately defeating the U.S. and the West. Today, 80 file boxes worth of evidence submitted during the 2008 Holy Land Foundation trial — the largest terror financing trial in U.S. history to date — including “The Project” documents, are being withheld from the American public by the Department of Justice.

On Wednesday, September 26, TheBlaze documentary unit released the first installment of this chilling two-part series outlining how the current administration has stonewalled repeated requests by Congress to release the disturbing documents and for allowing the Muslim Brotherhood greater entree into American government. Further the documentary reveals just how close American-Islamic operatives from groups such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) have been to subverting the U.S. and Israel.

The Holy Land Foundation trial

The lynchpin of documentary is found in the Holy Land Foundation trial, which was brought to bear by the Justice Department first in 2007 and then again in 2008 against the Holy Land Foundation, a “charity” that was later found to have funneled more than $12 million to the terrorist organization, Hamas. During the discovery process for the trial, prosecutors submitted 80 boxes of Islamic material including the The Project document. Strangely, “subject matter experts” were subsequently called in deemed the documents inadmissible as evidence. The identity of these experts or the grounds on which they came to their conclusion has never been revealed.

During the trial, five Islamists were convicted, including a founding board member of CAIR. The documentary also delves into many of the key players and American-Islamic groups currently operating against U.S. interests and discusses other un-indicted co-conspirators in the Holy Land Foundation trial.

Soviet and Nazi parallels

The first half of the documentary provides background on “The Project” documents and how the Muslim Brotherhood has been successfully waging a “propaganda” campaign in much the same way the former Soviet Union did before and during the Cold War. One such push advocated by the Brotherhood is to purge the U.S. and its government of anything deemed offensive to Islam, including teachers, lecturers and library books.

Among those interviewed for the series was Rep. Michele Bachmann, member of the House Intelligence Committee, who likened the “purging” of people and material critical of Islam as akin to the type of purging that was carried out in Nazi Germany at the behest of Adolf Hitler.

TheBlaze documentary team also drew stark parallels between the current climate surrounding the Muslim Brotherhood’s infiltration of U.S. government and that of the Communist infiltration of U.S. government during the Cold War. The documentary reminds viewers that after the Hitler-Stalin pact — a non-agression pact between the two nations during WWII — was violated, a contingent of Americans began a Communist “outreach” effort, believing it prudent to incorporate Communists into the U.S. government, including the Treasury Department and the pre-cursor to the C.I.A.

To place the Islamic threat in its proper context, the documentary notes how the Communist Manifesto, by all means nothing more than a minuscule pamphlet, became the greatest “life and death threaten to the Western world” until 1990. Likewise, Hitler’s book Mein Kampf (which, ironically means “my struggle,“ the same as ”jihad”) provided key insight into the führer’s political ideology and goals of world domination long before he put his “Final Solution” into effect.

Juxtaposing World War II and the Cold War with the current war on terror, the documentary also points out how critics of Islam today are being vilified in much the same way as was Republican Sen. Joseph McCarthy, and, ten years earlier, Democratic Senator Martin Dies Jr.. Ironically, both Dies and McCarthy were correct in their assertion that American government had been breached by those who championed a totalitarian ideology anathema to U.S. interests.

Today, those who question the Islamist-influence on U.S. government, or who call terrorism and Islamic extremists by their rightful names, are painted as “bigots” — much like those who questioned one’s Communist affiliation was dubbed a “Red Baiter.” This policy of shaming Islam-critics in the public square is a propagandist tool engineered to stifle honest and open dialogue.

Ironically, one of the panelists noted that were President Ronald Reagan in the Oval Office today, he would have considered Islamism a far more grave threat to the United States and greater Western world than was the Soviet Union.

Go to The Blaze to read the rest and see video clips

 

TheBlazeTV Unveils ‘The Project’ Part II: Civilization Jihad:

Nada’s documents

“The Project” documents were the work of Islamist Youssef Nada and became Muslims’ blueprint for defeating the U.S. by controlling speech through shame, coercion and blasphemy laws and by endearing Islamists and Islamist-causes to the U.S. government. The goal is to subvert the U.S. in a way that would be gradual, yet permanent.

Anyone who sees the parallel between Nada’s plan and how the U.S. government has recently latched onto the term “Islamophobia,” using it as a catalyst for purging FBI training manuals of information on Islam, or how Muslim Brotherhood members have been given entry into U.S. government, can see “civilization jihad” is already in full swing.

The document was drafted in 1982 and discovered during a raid by authorities in Switzerland in 2001. They were submitted as part of 80 boxes worth of evidence by prosecution during the Holy Land Foundation trial — the largest terror-funding trial in U.S. history to date — but were ultimatley not permitted for reasons that remain unknown. Today, “The Project” documents have been classified and are withheld from public view by the Department of Justice despite pleas by members of Congress to unseal the records.

Calling on experts like Stephen Coughlin, Andrew McCarthy and Rep. Michele Bachmann to name a few, The Project provides key insights into why Americans are currently witnessing an increase in political correctness where Islam is concerned, a U.S. “policy of appeasement” in the face of terrorist acts, and how members of the current administration are warming to a host of Muslim Brotherhood affiliates.

At the end of the day more than 700 documents and 300 presentations were deemed by “ unusable“ by alleged ”subject matter experts“ during the Holy Land trial because they were considered ”offensive to the Muslim community.” Even the FBI was denied the identity of who, exactly, these so-called subject matter experts were.

Since Nada’s blueprint was discovered and translated earlier on (and is provided below), his blueprint for what is essentially a global caliphate is clear. What is not clear are the details contained in the rest of the file boxes, or why the administration appears to be protecting those who seek jihad against the U.S. and the West. At the end of the day, lawmakers and experts are adamant that the documents belong not to the Executive Branch of U.S. government, but rather to the people.

Andrew McCarthy, the assistant U.S. attorney responsible for prosecuting the “Blind Sheik,” weighed in throughout the series, saying he did not see “any valid reason” nor any “legally compelling reason” to withhold the evidence.

Perhaps the most ironic point to note is that defendants in the Holy Land Foundation trial had access to these documents as part of the discovery process, yet when members of the House Judiciary Committee on oversight called on U.S. Attorney General to furnish them with the same, their attempts were stonewalled.

To note, the Holy Land Foundation was found guilty in 2008 of providing $12 million in funding to Hamas. Named as un-indicted co-conspirators in the trial were the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), both of which have documented ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Organization of the Islamic Conference

One of the ways in which Nada’s plan is currently manifesting itself, is through the Organization of Islamic the Conference, an international body comprising 56 Islamic states and the Palestinian Authority dedicated to Muslim economic, social, political and religious solidarity. In other words, a modern-day caliphate.

The largest undertaking by the OIC to date is, according to experts consulted in the documentary, to restrict U.S. First Amendment rights particularly with regards to slandering Islam. Sound familiar?

To this end, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton even attended a summit in Turkey to meet with the head of the OIC as he was garnering support for United Nations Resolution No. 1618 concerning defamation of religion.

Experts consulted agree that Clinton then “committed to a foreign entity” that she would use a classic method of shame and peer pressure to coerce all those who would stand in disagreement with the resolution.

Many forget that the caliphate, as embodied by the Ottoman Empire, existed less than 100 years ago. Experts consider the OIC a modern-day caliphate and it is already seeking the implementation of sharia law with regards to blaspheming against Islam through the UN Human Rights Council. In fact, the OIC proudly dubs itself the “Ummah,” or Muslim community. It should also be noted that the Obama White House has even appointed an OIC special envoy, Rashad Hussein.

Go to The Blaze read the rest and watch video clips

 

 

CAIR’s Information Momentum Warfare

By Cynthia E. Ayers 

There have recently been demands by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR — twice named an unindicted co-conspirator in the proceedings of federal terrorism trials) on the Department of Defense to drop Reza Kahlili (pseudonym) — a former CIA spy within the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and the most credible and accurate source of information and intelligence training regarding the current Iranian regime — as a lecturer for the Department of Defense.  Almost simultaneously, CAIR singled out Congresswoman Michele Bachmann in protest over the legitimate concerns raised by Representative Bachmann and four other members of Congress (Rep. Louie Gohmert, Rep. Trent Franks, Rep. Lynn Westmoreland, and Rep. Tom Rooney) about undue influence and possible infiltration of U.S. government entities by individuals with adversarial linkages.  These complaints indicate a bold rise in the level of personal attacks lodged by CAIR and other Muslim Brotherhood organizations.

It’s rather easy to target people who risked their own and family members’ lives, while operating within one of the most tyrannical regimes in history.  And quite astonishing that CAIR should use Mr. Kahlili’s conversion to Christianity as the main argument against him!  Are they attempting to strip Mr. Kahlili of his rights as a U.S. citizen as well as his ability to provide expertise that is currently so vital to our nation’s defense?  Or is CAIR using this complaint as a means to threaten his life because he dared to convert?

It’s also an incredible achievement when those who consort with or are linked in close relationships to individuals and organizations that openly call for the downfall of Western civilization are not only provided with high-level positions and the professional respect that accompanies such employment within the U.S. government (occasionally at the expense of those who express concerns), but also protected against any challenges from elected members of Congress by the challengers’ own colleagues!

Amazingly, many of those who not only succumb to the pressure of the payoff, but join in on attacking those who don’t conform to their version of “tolerance” are themselves condoning an intolerance of all they claim to have the “high ground” on.  Do they really think that they would be given safe haven to practice their freedoms under any form of sharia?  Do they have the slightest idea that conformance to sharia isn’t merely a matter of veiling?  The practice of multiculturalism and cultural relativism may seem utopian, but when it’s viewed only as a one-way responsibility by cultures with totalitarian mindsets, well…you’re not in Kansas anymore, Toto.  The United Kingdom’s Prime Minster David Cameron, former French President Nicolas Sarkozy, and German ChancellorAngela Merkel have all recently attempted to reevaluate multicultural programs and state responses that have developed over decades for the purpose of avoiding social confrontation.  Perhaps we should be following their example.

The manipulation of our society isn’t an overnight process — it has been a long-term, “strategic use of information operations … embedded with and emboldened by self-perpetuating elements that are both incremental and inescapable” — a.k.a. “Information Momentum Warfare.”  The weapons of choice are “‘lawfare,’ media manipulation, indoctrination, subversion, ‘truthful disinformation’ and demographic expectation management.”  As a result of their use, we’ve been conditioned, as a nation, to either adhere to political efficacies and one-sided definitions of politically correct “norms,” or be abandoned by society as “radicals” and “extremists.”  This conditioning has evolved into a willful acceptance of adversarial demands on our society — amazingly to the extent that our enemies are allowed to define themselves.  They have also been allowed to call the shots on what information law enforcement and military officials are given to “know” the enemy.  When we are unable to define an adversary who is obviously at work within our society, we instinctively default to those we are allowed to know about.  Thus, recently, the quest to understand enmity was turned inward.  “The enemy is us” — those who question the nature of true adversarial intent.  In effect, our attention has been drawn away from real dangers, the real enemies, and placed on a more socially palatable network of “violent extremists.”  Information Momentum Warfare is being used to “divide and conquer” us — theologically, philosophically, ideologically, economically, and politically.

Read more at American Thinker

Cynthia Ayers is currently director of the Task Force on National and Homeland Security, having retired from NSA after 38 years of federal service

CAIR’s Fight Against Pennsylvania Foreign Law Bill

by David J. Rusin
FrontPage Magazine


Resistance to a new bill aimed at limiting foreign law in Pennsylvania courts serves as a case study of how Islamists and their allies operate: peddling falsehoods about Shari’a, painting Muslims as victims, and denying that anyone seeks to institutionalize aspects of Islamic law — even as they vigorously promote that very agenda. With similar legislation being debated across the U.S., understanding their tactics is critical.

At issue in Pennsylvania is House Bill (HB) 2029, which stipulates that “a tribunal shall not consider a foreign legal code or system which does not grant … the same fundamental liberties, rights and privileges” as guaranteed by the federal and state constitutions. Introduced in November, it follows the American Laws for American Courts (ALAC) model and makes no mention of Shari’a. A preliminary memo sent to legislators last June in the name of Rep. RoseMarie Swanger, HB 2029’s chief sponsor, does highlight Islamic law, but she later said that it had been circulated accidentally. Regardless, concerns about Shari’a are warranted due to its many provisions that conflict with the standards of American jurisprudence. For example, it disadvantages women in terms of inheritance, divorce, child custody, and other areas of family law. Shari’a already has shaped numerous cases nationwide, including in Pennsylvania, where one state court decided how assets should be distributed according to Islam.

Pushback against HB 2029 has been led by the Philadelphia office of the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-PA) and was punctuated by an interfaith press conference (video here) at CAIR-PA headquarters on December 14. The overall campaign reflects CAIR’s usual recipe of distortion, victimology, and contradiction between words and deeds.

Attacks on bills like HB 2029 begin by sowing confusion about Shari’a. Because Islamic law encompasses virtually every facet of life — governing personal activities such as eating and worship, but also forming an oppressive social and legal structure — suit-and-tie Islamists work to emphasize its unthreatening pieces whenever possible. CAIR-PA executive director Moein Khawaja’s suggestion that Shari’a should worry Pennsylvanians no more than halal gyros is a fine example of this technique.

Others brazenly misrepresent the unsavory components, as Haider Ala Hamoudi, a University of Pittsburgh law professor, did when he was interviewed by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Hamoudi insisted that women and children would suffer if judges could not consider Shari’a — a stretch, given how it discriminates against women, including in disputes over children. Moving beyond the types of cases that are adjudicated in U.S. courts, he depicted the requirement of testimony by four male witnesses to convict someone of adultery as an exemplar of Islamic enlightenment that protects against false accusations. In practice, however, it can be a nightmare for women in those Muslim countries where the same scriptural passages are interpreted as mandating four witnesses even to prove rape. Robert Spencer further explains, “If the required male witnesses can’t be found, the victim’s charge of rape becomes an admission of adultery,” too often leading to her imprisonment.

Hamoudi also contended that harsh punishments used in Iran and elsewhere, like cutting off hands for stealing, have little to do with Shari’a and are “more a matter of identity politics” in response to Western influence. The man deserves credit for artful misdirection, as it is not every day that brutal penalties prescribed by the Koran itself are chalked up to blowback from cultural imperialism.

When distortion of Shari’a is insufficient, Islamists and their collaborators characterize Muslims as the targets of a shadowy cabal of “Islamophobes.” Hence, Pennsylvanians were treated to Marwan Kreidie, a major figure in the Philadelphia Islamist scene, describing Swanger’s faith-neutral bill as “an exercise in discrimination” and claiming that “there’s a conspiracy afoot here.” CAIR-PA’s Khawaja followed up by taking the ad hominem route, trashing HB 2029 as the brainchild of “anti-Muslim, white supremacist David Yerushalmi.” See Yerushalmi’s recent article for a reply to the typical assaults on his character.

Yet no hyperbole topped that of Rabbi Linda Holtzman, who played the Nazi card at CAIR-PA’s press conference. “The echoes for me are strong of Germany in the 1930s,” she said, “when repeatedly Jewish law was brought forward and defamed in the courts as a means of defaming all of Jewish tradition.” Aside from the sheer ugliness of the analogy, Shari’a could be “defamed” only by spreading inaccuracies about it. HB 2029 does not reference Islam or Islamic law, while the memocorrectly labels Shari’a as “inherently hostile to our constitutional liberties.” Sometimes the truth hurts.

Islamists also maintain that bills such as HB 2029 are unnecessary because, they say, there is no attempt by adherents of Islam to undermine the American legal system, but their actions away from the cameras inevitably belie their soothing words. Indeed, not long after it issued a press release dismissing concerns about the advance of Shari’a as “conspiracy theories” to be “mocked,” CAIR-PA announced that its 2012 banquet will be headlined by two men who have expressed support for transforming the U.S. into a Shari’a-run state: Siraj Wahhaj and Sherman Jackson.

Wahhaj, a radical imam who appeared on a federal prosecutor’s “list of unindicted persons who may be alleged as co-conspirators” in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, has warned that “unless America … accepts the Islamic agenda,” it will fall. He has talked positively of Islamic law supplanting the U.S. Constitution and opined that “if only Muslims were clever politically, they could take over the United States and replace its constitutional government with a caliphate.”

Jackson, now a professor at USC, has been equally explicit. Calling him “an outspoken proponent of the Islamist subversion of Western civilization,” Cinnamon Stillwell explains that in a book Jackson coauthored, he “proposes that American Muslims approach the ‘difficult task of penetrating, appropriating and redirecting American culture’ … to ‘influence the legal order in America.’” He writes that “once this is done, there are no Constitutional impediments to having these [Islamic] laws applied in the public domain.” Jackson even muses about how gradual “changes in American culture” could result in the normalization of barbaric punishments such as stoning and flogging.

In short, Islamists do not merely insult the character of those who back bills like HB 2029; they insult the intelligence of all through claims that turn reality on its head and are contradicted by their own actions. Nothing less should be expected. They obfuscate Islamic law and portray Muslims as victims because the facts about Shari’a simply are not palatable to most Americans. Moreover, stealth jihadists shamelessly say one thing and do another because they have faith that the mainstream media will not hold them accountable.

How to proceed? Education neutralizes falsehoods, so Americans need to continue the long-term project of informing themselves about Shari’a and the challenge it presents; useful resources may be found at this website. Likewise, all politicians must learn to speak more precisely about Islamic law, carefully distinguishing between practices that are protected by the U.S. Constitution and those that are not, thus minimizing the confusion that Islamists exploit. As for individuals who equate Nazism with defending Americans from foreign laws that infringe on fundamental rights, they should be called out for affronting both history and decency. Citizens also must encourage legislators to press on with these bills despite Islamist propaganda, biased media, and the occasional scolding from their multiculturalism-obsessed counterparts; readers wishing to contact the primary sponsor of HB 2029 may do so here.

Finally, as Islamist groups often argue against restrictions on foreign law by denying the existence of any campaign to insinuate Shari’a into American society, their own records of participating in this very movement should be hung around their necks for all to see. Given that much of the opposition to ALAC-inspired efforts throughout the U.S. has been helmed by branches of CAIR — an offspring of the Muslim Brotherhood, which dreams of implementing Islamic law worldwide and describes its mission in North America as “eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within” — the letters, op-eds, and blog posts can practically write themselves.

While it is important to wade into the details and answer specific criticisms of bills to curb foreign law, the best defense may be a good offense. Just as Islamists make the supporters of such legislation an issue by smearing them as bigots, those supporters must make the opponents an issue by exposing their rank dishonesty and jihadist objectives, which comprise exactly the kind of subversion that these bills are designed to thwart.

David J. Rusin is a research fellow at Islamist Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum.