Australian Police Kill Muslim Jihadi While Sydney’s Islamic Community Feigns Shock

397141-sheik-man-haron-monis-450x253UTT, by John Guandolo, Dec. 16, 2014:

Australian Police stormed a cafe in Sydney today (Dec 15) killing an Iranian Sunni Muslim who had taken hostages and made demands, ending the siege which began yesterday.

This incident is instructive in so many ways because of:  (1) the language used by all sides to describe the perpetrator – Man Haron Monis (a Jihadi); (2) attempts by the media to differentiate Monis from the broader Muslim community which claims he was completely “unknown” to them;  (3) what Monis said and did, which is being interpreted through a Western lense instead of the Islamic lens (Sharia);  and (4) the immediate response from the Islamic community in Australia, which is calling for more concessions from Australia for Muslims at the same time one of it’s own killed people in the non-Muslim community.  This last note is the exact same response we always see around the world when a Muslim kills a soldier in Arkansas, beheads people anywhere, blows up a bomb in Boston, shoots and kills soldiers at Fort Hood, or any of a number of other events in recent memory.  Muslims kill, then demand more concessions and call for protection from the oncoming “backlash” which, oddly enough, never comes.

The Language We Use to Describe the Enemy

At the outset, let us all be reminded that the filter through which Islamic jihadis speak, communicate and understand words is SHARIA (Islamic Law).  So when they speak, the words they use, although they may be in English, cannot be interpreted the way we understand those words in the West.  We must use Sharia as the filter through which we understand these words.  As an example, when Muslim leaders say they “condemn terrorism” they are not lying as some have suggested.  “Terrorism” as Islam understands it is to “kill a Muslim without right.”   Under Sharia, Western troops are, in fact, terrorists when killing Muslims in Iraq, Afghanistan or elsewhere.  This is an important fact for our military and law enforcement leadership to know when local Imams decry terrorism, because it does not represent a friendly move towards us or our position.  In Sharia, it is lawful for a Muslim to be killed in only a few instances, most notably when he or she leaves Islam (Apostacy).  In this case, if the Muslim refuses to return to Islam he/she must be “immediately killed.” (Um Dat al Salik, Book O Justice, o8.2)

The Prime Minister of Australia – Tony Abbott – referring to the siege in Sydney, said it is “profoundly shocking” that a man would take “innocent” hostages like this, and was unsure of the motive for this attack.  How shocking is it that a Muslim cleric who recently converted from Shia to Sunni Islam would participate in jihad since it is not only an obligation in Islam until the world is under the rule of Sharia, but is the sixth right of pure worship between man and Allah.  Jihad is not a “pillar” of Islam because when the entire world is under Sharia, the need for jihad goes away.  There is no such thing as a “version” of Islam that does not include this requirement.

How does Islam define “innocent” people?  Only Muslims are “innocent” under Islamic Law (sharia), so, according to Sharia none of those hostages were “innocent” therefore they can always be killed by a Muslim jihadi.

Many in the news media have been quick to call Man Haron Monis a “lone wolf” a “radical Muslim Cleric” or (this one I love) a “violent extremist,” which means absolutely nothing at all.  Are these accurate statements?  Is there such a thing in Sharia as a “lone wolf?”  The answer to both questions is a resounding ‘No.’  As a matter of fact, the Law of Jihad in Sharia defines ‘Individual Jihad’ and provides the requirements for it.  Individual Jihad is the kind of jihad we have seen at places like Fort Hood, Little Rock Arkansas, Wichita, New York City, and elsewhere.  Australia’s leaders and media use phrases like “lone wolf” and “radical Muslims” because these are the phrases fed to them by the leaders of the Islamic community, most of whom are Muslim Brotherhood/Salafis, as is true in most other nations in the West.

Watering Down Monis’ Actions

It is also interesting to witness the Australian media bending over backwards to distance Man Haron Monis’ actions from “true Islam” because “no religion supports violence” as world leaders continue to say – which is contrary to a factual analysis of Sharia (Islamic doctrine).  In fact, 100% of all published Sharia mandates jihad until the entire world is under the rule of Islam and Islamic Law (Sharia), and 100% of all published authoritative Sharia only defines “jihad” as ‘warfare against non-Muslims.”  These are statements of fact with cannot be contradicted factually or by any Islamic doctrine.  Therefore, Islamic doctrine not only condones violence, it mandates it.

SydneyBlackFlag

When hostages were made to hold the black flag of jihad in the window of the cafe in which they were being held by Monis, many news organizations reached out to their “Muslim experts” to help us all understand what this could mean.  The most absurd of these was the UK’s Guardian which quoted Aftab Malik, a “high level expert” working for with the UN, who stated “It has no politically dominant or ideological meaning.  It only has a spiritual meaning.”  Friends, this is a lie.

This is the same man who blames Australia’s jihadi threat on those who essentially speak truth about Islam.

The black flag of jihad contains the Shahada in Arabic, which is the statement of conversion into Islam.  It is the flag which has been used by jihadis since the earliest days of Islam.  To disconnect this flag from Jihad is to be disconnected from reality.

Backlash?

The leading Islamic organizations in Australia (read: Salafists/Muslim Brotherhood) are calling for help and protection against the backlash directed at the Islamic community, and even offered up the story that a Muslim woman was harassed in light of the cafe siege in Sydney.  It appears the intellectual honesty is completely gone when it comes to these matters.

I believe if we put the facts on the table of what Islam commands from its adherents, as well as the fact that the leading Islamic organization are a part of the global Islamic Movement led by the Muslim Brotherhood, and then we tally up the hundreds of thousands of people killed around the world in the last 10 years by Muslims, it gets a little tough to sympathize with people in the Muslim community getting harassed.

Here is an idea for the Islamic leaders:  stop killing non-Muslims or be prepared for a real backlash.

Hunting Known Wolves

CyberJihad11-190x150CSP, by Kyle Shideler, Dec. 16, 2014:

The Sydney Siege once again reminded us that terrorist so popularly characterized as nigh undetectable “Lone Wolves” are really nothing of the sort. Rather they are “Known” wolves. That is, far from being invisible, they are terrorists who have had repeated brushes with intelligence or law enforcement but against whom no action was taken. The phenomenon suggests, that, far from what critics like Glenn Greenwald would have us believe, government surveillance efforts actually do work.  Should we really be outraged that some 280,000 individuals have made the U.S. electronic surveillance list despite having “no known affiliation”? It’s a designation which includes those comparable to Sydney hostage taker Sheikh Haron, who did not declare his allegiance to the Islamic State until the beginning of December only a week or two before his terrorist attack which killed two, injured more, and drew non-stop media attention.

The problem of course is that even though individuals are perhaps being surveiled for their support for jihad, whether abroad or domestically, or perhaps even publicly advocating for violence, this doesn’t always put them within the range of a prosecutable crime.

While material support laws may come into effect for those conducting propaganda on behalf of declared terrorist groups (Al Qaeda, Hamas, etc), a generic call to wage jihad or “slay the unbelievers wherever you find them” may be alarming, but would not, under U.S. law, necessarily be illegal. Nor should it be. Freedom of speech is an inalienable right, and a cherished western freedom. In places where hate speech laws exist, the tendency has been for them to be enforced in a one-sided manner which actually leaves pro-Jihadi preachers alone while targeting those who oppose them.

What options are available? Firstly, law enforcement efforts to introduce informants to prospective terrorists or conduct “stings.” Such operations have proven highly effective at ferreting out and leading to the successful prosecution of would-be jihadists before they strike. This can be done in online chatrooms, but also needs to be permissible in all places where these “unaffiliated” potential “known wolves” congregate, including mosques aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood or other groups who play a role in indoctrination for jihad, as well as Muslim Student Associations, and other area “incubators.” To be successful however, informants and undercover operatives need to be able to talk the talk, which requires an understanding of jihad doctrine, which cannot be effectively done without understanding Shariah law.

Of course for this precise reason the use of informants and sting tactics have been under incredible pressure by Muslim Brotherhood-linked groups and far-left groups, as I have previously written. Despite what Al Jazeera and groups like Human Rights Watch say, law enforcement stings are not “human rights violations” but a necessary counterterrorism tactic.

Secondly, In the U.S., federal law enforcement are reluctance to name jihadist attacks as terrorism which creates a need for state-level options. One possibility is “Andy’s Law,” named for Private Andy Long, killed by supposedly “lone wolf” Carlos Bledsoe. Andy’s Law works to strengthen state-level material support for terrorism statutes by both increasing criminal penalties and greatly increasing the civil liability of individuals and entities which provide material support for terrorism.

In civil court, under Andy’s Law, someone who commits an act of terrorism or supports terrorism would be subjected to attorney fees, plus treble damages. This creates a civil cause of action for a victim of terror, which means it incentivizes attorneys to come to the victim’s support and to go after an entity suspected of radicalizing them. The possibility of civil action creates the opportunity for legal “discovery” which in turn helps bring to public view more information about how jihadist incubators radicalize adherents. Andy’s Law has already passed in a number of states.

There may be other possible avenues for reform which could help crack down on would-be jihadists without hampering free speech, and a discussion of what reforms would be necessary should take place. But it is long past time to stop feigning helplessness, simply because would-be terrorists subscribe to a violent ideology, rather than swearing allegiance to a specific violent group. Let’s stop hiding behind the moniker of lone wolves, and make the changes that are necessary to help law enforcement start hunting.

Defining Jihad Downward

Screen-Shot-2014-12-12-at-2.44.37-PM-190x142CSP, By Kyle Shideler:

My colleague Adam Savit has already taken the BBC to task for their write up of a recent report on Jihadist violence in the month of November, which neglected to include the murder of Israelis. This led me to drill down deeper into the report by the International Center for the Study of Radicalisation and Political violence. Not only did the report neglect to include Hamas violence in its study of jihadi attacks, but it does so explicitly and intentionally. The report notes:

This definition excludes Shia militant groups such as Hezbollah that justify fighting in the name of jihad but are located outside the Sunni tradition. Indeed, the jihadists of al Qaeda, the Islamic State and like-minded groups regard Hezbollah as ‘apostates’ and have been among the most vociferous opponents of Shia militant groups in places like Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen.

The definition also excludes the Palestinian group Hamas which advocates ‘jihad’ and – unlike Hezbollah – is widely recognized as Sunni. Its religious, social and political doctrine, however, is not Salafist.
Jihadist groups such as al Qaeda have repeatedly condemned Hamas for recognizing man-made laws and becoming involved in democratic elections, while Hamas, in turn, has repressed – and fought against – jihadist groups.

This justification is at best ignorant, and at worst mendacious.

While it is true that Hezbollah is fighting Islamic State and Al Qaeda in Syria, Hezbollah also has a long history of cooperation with Al Qaeda. Are the authors of this report unaware that it was Hezbollah which introduced Al Qaeda to the truck bombing techniques used in the Africa Embassy bombings (a role for which they have been held responsible in court) and that relationships between Iran’s terrorist facilitators the IRGC, Hezbollah and AL Qaeda were forged during the Pan Arab and Islamic Conference held by Sudan in the 1990s? Perhaps they are equally unaware that Hezbollah’s patron, Iran, has been held responsible for its role in 9/11 in federal court, due to its role in facilitating the movement of the hijackers, and that the 9/11 Commission notes the role of Hezbollah’s master terrorist Imad Mugniyeh in assisting the 9/11 attacks? One supposes that given its narrow justification the ICSR would not consider the  Embassy bombings or the 9/11 attacks  “jihadist” violence either.

Then there is the ICSR’s statement on Hamas. Hamas is the wing of the Muslim Brotherhood responsible for engaging in jihad terror against Israel. Hamas is completely open about this connection, having documented it in its original founding charter. Hamas was perhaps best described by leading Hamas representative Ismail Haniyeh who remarked that Hamas is the “jihadi movement of the Brotherhood with a Palestinian face.” From its earliest foundation, The Muslim Brotherhood’s own founder Hasan Al-Banna described his movement as consisting of “a Salafiyya message…”  Prior to founding the Brotherhood Al-Banna was himself a member of the Salafi groups, including the Society for the Prevention of the Forbidden.

Further more, Muslim Brotherhood ideologue Sayyid Qutb’s most important work “Milestones”, was a major inspiration for Osama Bin Laden (according to the 9/11 Commission report again) and consists entirely of a discussion regarding how to restore the world to Islam, while using the methods of the early Muslims (i.e. Salaf).  The original founder of the MAK (Afghan Service Bureau) Abdullah Azzam together with Osama Bin Laden, and the author of “In Defense of Muslim Lands” the doctrinal work which best established Jihad as an fard al-ayn (individual obligation), was both a Muslim Brother and a co-founder of Hamas.  Azzam’s picture is still visible in the offices of Hamas today.

Besides Sayyid Qutb and Abdullah Azzam,  other Muslim Brotherhood members have also played a key role in creating the very doctrine of Al Qaeda, such as Abdul Mjid Aziz Al-Zindani, the leading cleric of the Yemeni branch of Muslim Brotherhood, was a close mentor of Osama Bin Laden and a contact of the AQ-linked Ansar al-Islam.  Al-Zindani was also a board member of the specially designated entity the Union of the Good, an organization run by Muslim Brotherhood cleric Yusuf Al Qaradawi, whose primary purpose is to fund Hamas.

The claim by ICSR that Hezbollah and Hamas should be excluded from an accounting of Jihadist violence merely because they (at times) have disagreed with Al Qaeda or other jihadist groups is utterly inane. After all Al Qaeda and ISIS are currently locked in a struggle themselves (see for example this video released today by MEMRI featuring ISIS members interrogating Jabhat al Nusra members and denouncing them as apostates), and Muslim Brotherhood-linked militias in the Syrian civil war fight alongside Al Qaeda, and yet the ICSR can’t quite bring itself to declare that Al Qaeda is not a jihadist group.

Jihad as religiously-obligatory warfare to establish Islamic law remains a concept which extends across both Sunni and Shia sects, and amongst all schools of Islamic law. There is no legitimate justification for excluding these groups, and to do so is to reduce the term “jihad” or “jihadist violence” until it is becomes meaningless. The reality is that Jihadist violence is a threat larger than simply just the “Salafi-jihadi” matrix which some insist on shoving it into.

The Threat of Qatar: Is the American Media and Political Class finally waking up?

Skyline of Doha at night - Wikipedia

Skyline of Doha at night – Wikipedia

By William Michael – Qatar Awareness Campaign

Over the past two days, several news reports have emerged that suggest the media and, yes, even some politicians in Washington, have begun to appreciate the threat posed by the small Gulf State of Qatar.

On December 9, a bipartisan group of 24 members of Congress wrote a letter to the Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, David S. Cohen, that stated in part:

“We are concerned about the ties between Qatar and Hamas, and we commend you on your speech before the Center for a New American Security, where you stated that, ‘Qatar, a longtime U.S. ally, has for many years openly financed Hamas,’ and that press reports indicate that the Qatari government is also ‘supporting extremist groups operating in Syria,’ further adding to the instability of the region. As you noted in your speech, there are private fundraising networks in Qatar that solicit donations for terrorists. Qatar, in your words, is ‘a permissive terrorist financing environment.’”

It urged Treasury to focus on terrorist financing from Qatar and another Muslim Brotherhood-dominated country, Turkey. They made it clear that anti-terrorism officials in Treasury should do everything possible in their power to end Qatari and Turkish financing of jihadi groups. These groups have destabilized the Middle East and North Africa, and are a significant factor in America’s rapidly deteriorating relations with Russia.

On December 10, The Daily Beast published an article that, for the mainstream press, called Qatar out pretty straight: as they put it, they’re “the world’s most two-faced nation.”

Two-faced indeed. Qatar simultaneously hosts, and pays for the campuses of, Georgetown (where they help train American diplomats), Carnegie Mellon (which is in partnership with the Department of Defense), and Cornell, yet also hosts the Nazi-rooted Muslim Brotherhood. They try to pass themselves off as “progressives,” but have been implicated in funding the genocidal armies of ISIS. Qatar’s capital, Doha, is home to two large American military bases and CENTCOM for the region, yet 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was a guest of their Minister of Religious Affairs from 1992-1996.

How do they get away with this behavior? Surely, a lack of public awareness about the tiny country is one reason. Most Americans have never heard of Qatar, and even fewer know how to pronounce its name – “cutter,” or depending on the Arabic accent, “gutter.” And yes, anonymity is an asset to any criminal, especially a criminal regime.

But while anonymity only goes so far, a vast ocean of money goes much further. Qatar is, per capita, the richest country in the world (~$93,000 in 2013). With the globe’s third largest natural gas reserves (behind Russia and Iran), the less than 300,000 Qatari citizens have cash to burn.

And, since we’re on the topic of burning, Qatar’s foreign policy seems to be that of burning down their neighbors’ countries (unfortunately, with American backing). The Arab Spring, which a) caused widespread death and destruction in Egypt b) left Syria in an unending civil war, and c) still has Libya in a state of utter chaos, further complicated by a Qatari proxy war against Egypt and the UAE… all these Islamist insurrections were and are backed by the Qatari government; specifically, by the Muslim Brotherhood leaders who reside there and the sympathizing Al-Thani royal family. More than any other nation, it is Qatar who is seeking to re-establish an Islamic Caliphate. To accomplish this, they don’t much care if the world, and infidel, are lit on fire.

The other side of Islamist gangs, which is rarely given enough coverage in the media, is the organized crime aspect of these stateless, revolutionary entities. Whether it’s Boko Haram in Nigeria, Al Qaeda in Iraq, AQIM across North Africa, or the Taliban in Afghanistan, Islamist terrorist organizations double as cartels. Narcotics, human trafficking, racketeering, and the usual terrorizing of local populations are their trademarks.

It should come as a surprise to no one that tiny, corrupt, and fabulously wealthy Qatar has at one time or another financed all of the above terrorist groups.

Do you think that the Al-Thanis do this out of the goodness of their Islamist hearts? Or is it more realistic to think that, just maybe, they are recipients of ill-gotten billions resulting from organized crime?

To explain the Qatari way of “diplomacy” to yourself, try this thought experiment. A man in a very expensive suit hands you five checkbooks. He gives you a mission: make as many friends as possible, who, should his reputation ever be questioned in public, will come to his defense. To accomplish this, you are permitted write checks up to $10 million and hand them out freely. Considering how much political coverage and favors can be purchased from American politicians and media for relatively less, it’s no wonder Qatar has so many “friends.”

In fact, Qatar’s “friends” comprise a veritable “Who’s Who” of the American (and even international) establishment. During the month of October, the Qatar Awareness Campaign, an ad hoc Coalition of concerned journalists, activists, publishers, and researchers published a letter each weekday, identifying American interests and individuals compromised by Qatari money and/or who toe the Qatari line. Many of the figures named might surprise you: Michael Bloomberg, ExxonMobil, Al Gore,John McCain, The Boeing Company, Miramax, the Chamber of Commerce, CNN, Harvard University,Bill and Hillary Clinton, FIFA, to name just a few.

Do you see now why it has taken so long for the political and media figures to finally peep up, even just a little? Hint: they’re bought off, paid for… and you – the American citizen – don’t have a blank checkbook like the terror masters in Doha.

Maybe, just maybe, the tide is beginning to turn. If the American public, and the global public, understood that the U.S. government had as one of its closest allies a narco-terror slave state, the politicians would be forced to act, if merely to save face. Terrorism in the United States is still a crime, and those who support it are therefore guilty under penalty of law.

Recently, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel announced he was resigning from his position as the civilian head of the Pentagon. Among the most prominent reasons given for his departure was the continuing debacle in the Middle East.   It was also reported that he never established a good relationship with Obama’s inner circle. In this respect, Hagel’s frustrations were certainly in no small part tied to Qatar; for it was the Qatari royal family, the Al-Thanis, who bankrolled and strategically coordinated the Arab Spring, and who remain so intimate with the administration as to accept and shelter the Taliban 5 for the deserter Bowe Bergdahl. (That infamous deal, it is worth mentioning, was finalized while the former Qatari Emir was visiting with Obama at West Point, attending the graduation of his son.)

Hagel, if pressed, may indeed admit that Obama’s alliance with Qatar and the Al-Thanis was the ultimate driver behind his resignation. Might we soon get some truth from the only Republican in Obama’s cabinet?

Secretary Hagel, your country needs you to speak up NOW!

Originally posted at Right Side News

Brotherhood Ideologue Qaradawi Expelled From Islamic Council

Sheikh Yousef al-Qaradawi, Muslim Brotherhood ideologue.

Sheikh Yousef al-Qaradawi, Muslim Brotherhood ideologue.

Clarion Project:

Groups led by Muslim Brotherhood ideologue Sheikh Yousef al-Qaradawi have been expelled from the International Islamic Council for Da’wah and Relief. The Cairo based council, which performs Islamic proselytizing and charity work, expelled Qaradawi’s International Union of Muslim Scholars on the grounds they mixed religion and politics and supported terrorism. The council has over 80 organizations in its ranks and performs work all over the world.

The council made the ruling in a session on Tuesday, alongside senior figures from Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.  The council is headed by the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar, the most respected authority in the Sunni Islamic world and one of the world’s oldest universities.

Qaraqawi’s group was expelled alongside ten other organizations. These included the London based Islamic Relief Worldwide. Last month Islamic Relief was listed as a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates, along with the Muslim Brotherhood and affiliated organizations such as the U.S. based Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Muslim American Society (MAS).

Sheikh Yousef al-Qaradawi is the leading ideologue of the Muslim Brotherhood. He guides members on religious matters and his interpretation of Islam is followed by the group. He has spoken out in the past in favor of female genital mutilation, on which subject he later claimed to have changed his mind, and wife beating. He has been filmed calling for the next holocaust against Jews to be perpetrated by Muslims and has personally expressed his desire to take part in such an event.

Read more

GCC states to create regional police, navy

A general view of the meeting of leaders during the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) summit in Doha on Dec. 9, 2014. (AFP)

A general view of the meeting of leaders during the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) summit in Doha on Dec. 9, 2014. (AFP)

Al Arabiya, Dec. 9, 2014:

Following the 35th GCC Summit on Tuesday, Gulf leaders announced in Doha the creation of a regional police force in addition to a joint naval force, the Associated Press reported.

Qatari Foreign Minister Sheikh Khalid Bin Mohammed Al-Attiyah said the police force would improve cooperation against terrorism.

“It will be an Interpol-like force but inside GCC countries,” he told reporters at a news conference.

The police force will be based out of the United Arab Emirates’ capital of Abu Dhabi while the naval force will operate out of Bahrain.

The creation of the police force, known as GCC-POL, and the naval force, was announced at the conclusion of the Gulf bloc’s annual summit in Qatar.

Separately, in a communique read during the closing remarks, the leaders reiterated their support for a political solution in both Yemen and Syria and condemned the militias currently operating in Libya.

They also voiced their support of the Libyan elected national council as the legitimate body to govern the country.

In statements made during the closing of the summit, the leaders said they hoped that the newly-appointed U.N. peace envoy to Syria Staffan De Mistura be successful in expediting a solution.

Additionally, the communique announced that the leaders unanimously supported the political roadmap in Egypt and President Abdul Fattah al-Sisi.

Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Salman bin Abdulaziz al-Saud announced that the next summit is to be held in Riyadh.

Separately, as the leaders arrived in Qatar for the summit ahead of the meeting, they honored the Emir of Kuwait, Sheikh Sabah Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah for receiving a certificate from the U.N. Secretary General recognizing him as a leader and supporter of the United Nation’s humanitarian work.

“Honoring the State of Kuwait is an honor for all GCC countries,” he said.

Speaking at the beginning of the summit, Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani said Tuesday’s meeting comes at a time of highly complex regional and international circumstances.

Prince Tamim also said he hopes the summit would mark the launch of a new march of GCC cooperation.

Read more

Also see:

Emerson on ISIS in Canada, restrictions on RCMP, and the mother of all Islamic terrorist groups; Muslim Brotherhood

White House Statement Ignores Brotherhood’s Continuing Hamas Support

797IPT News
December 5, 2014

The White House this week issued a statement explaining why it does not view the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group. It was in response to an online petition which attracted more than 213,000 signatures in support of designating the Egyptian-based group.

The statement emphasizes a lack of “credible evidence that the Muslim Brotherhood has renounced its decades-long commitment to non-violence.”

The Brotherhood has another decades-long commitment, however, one that clearly endorses and supports terrorist attacks against Israel. That support began with Article Two of the Hamas charter, which clearly identifies it as “one of the wings of Muslim Brothers in Palestine.” It continues today with statements inciting and supporting Hamas attacks.

As the war between Israel and Gaza raged in August, a statement on the Brotherhood’s website translated by the Investigative Project on Terrorism praised “the valiant resistance factions [who] gave them [Palestinians] a lesson in heroism, faith, and courage. They decimated their soldiers and their officers…” Violent confrontation, the statement continued, “is the natural position which must be adopted with the heroes of Palestine, who have proven that the defeat of the Zionists as possible, which is closer when the will of the Umma [people] is united, with God’s will.”

President Obama publicly stood by Israel’s “right to defend itself against what I consider to be inexcusable attacks from Hamas,” including its indiscriminate rocket fire at Israeli civilian communities. The Brotherhood, by contrast, called for more attacks and “the defeat of the Zionists.”

That was not enough for the administration to question its “decades-long commitment to non-violence.” Other Brotherhood statements show that this is consistent rhetoric, even in more peaceful times.

A June message called “resistance to the occupier Zionist enemy” – a sterilized reference to terrorism – “a legitimate right and a sacred duty approved by all laws and customs and constitutions, and it is the only viable way to restore rights and reply to aggression.”

An April 2010 statement, marking the 62nd anniversary of Israel’s creation – what Palestinians call the Nakba, or catastrophe – said the only acceptable path is to continue trying to destroy an existing country.

“T]he Zionist destruction will only be by an Islamic, Arab plan which rejects peace begging initiative proposed since 2002; rejects normalization measures with the Zionist entity; reviews peace agreements and diplomatic relations with it; rejects foolish negotiations between Zionists and Palestinians which are like negotiations between the lamb and the wolf pack,” the Brotherhood statement said.

The United States has considered Hamas a terrorist group since 1995, when President Bill Clinton signed an executive order decrying “grave acts of violence committed by foreign terrorists that disrupt the Middle East peace process” and threaten American national security.

The United States has a record of aggressively pursuing Hamas-support operations within the country. It shut down the Texas-based Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF)’s assets in December 2001, labeling it a Specially Designated Global Terrorist. This action was based on the foundation’s routing of millions of dollars to Hamas-controlled charities in the West Bank and Gaza. Later, the governmentprosecuted and a jury convicted the foundation and five former officials.

Internal records seized by the FBI and entered into evidence in that prosecution showed that HLF operated under the umbrella of a group called the Palestine Committee, which was created by the Muslim Brotherhood and tasked with supporting Hamas politically and financially.

Some might argue that was a long time ago. But a look at Brotherhood actions and rhetoric indicates it continues to be fully supportive of Hamas and its violent attacks against Israelis.

Reports earlier this week indicate that members of Jordan’s Muslim Brotherhood branch were arrested for trying to smuggle weapons into the West Bank to facilitate terror attacks.

Yusuf al-Qaradawi, considered the Brotherhood’s most influential cleric, urged Muslimsto wage “the greatest battle of liberation” against Israel and the Jews in an online posting last month. Qaradawi, who also has a highly-rated program on Al-Jazeera, has an ever-expanding record of endorsing terrorist attacks and has prayed for the chance to “go to the land of Jihad and resistance” and “shoot Allah’s enemies, the Jews,” before he dies.

Interpol issued a bulletin Friday indicating that Qaradawi, 88, was wanted by Egyptian authorities for “incitement and assistance to commit intentional murder.”

After Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi, a Brotherhood official, was forced from office in July 2013 in the wake of massive street protests against his rule, the Brotherhood’s political party posted a memo on Facebook inciting followers to take out their frustrations by burning Coptic churches.

“The Pope of the Church (Coptic Pope Tawadros II) took part in the ouster of the first elected Islamist president. The Pope of the Church charges Islamic Sharia with underdevelopment [and] stagnation,” the memo from the Freedom and Justice Party’s branch in Egypt’s Helwan Governorate, near Cairo, said.

“And for the Church to adopt a war against Islam and Muslims is the worst crime. For every action is a reaction.”

Before Morsi’s ouster, the White House welcomed a delegation of Muslim Brotherhood officials, even helping clear their path to avoid standard airport inspections as they landed in the United States.

State Department officials had numerous contacts with Brotherhood officials in the years leading up to Egypt’s Arab Spring revolution.

U.S. Ambassador Anne Patterson reported in an April 2010 cable that Muslim Brotherhood Supreme Guide Mohammed Badie had “reaffirmed the MB was a non-violent” movement.

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper similarly described the Muslim Brotherhood in February 2011 as “largely secular” and said that it “eschewed violence.” Four months later, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said the U.S. planned to expand dialogue with the Brotherhood as part of a commitment “to engage with all parties that are peaceful and committed to nonviolence.”

Read more

Breaking News: Interpol Alert Seeks Arrest of MB’s Qaradawi

Youssef Qaradawi

Youssef Qaradawi

by IPT News  •  Dec 5, 2014

Interpol issued a bulletin Friday seeking the arrest of the Muslim Brotherhood’s most influential cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi. The bulletin was sparse on details but said that Egypt wanted the 88-year-old Qaradawi “to serve a sentence” for crimes including “incitement and assistance to commit intentional murder.”

Qaradawi lives in Qatar. He also is alleged to have had a hand in a massive prison break of Brotherhood members and others during the revolution against then-dictator Hosni Mubarak. Mohamed Morsi, a Brotherhood official who went on to become Egypt’s president in 2012, was among those who escaped.

Qaradawi has been a fierce critic of Egypt’s new government and of Morsi’s July 2013ouster after one year in office. “From the day he (new President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi) came, all we saw is killing and bloodshed, detention and women being raped,” Qaradawi before elections in May.

In February, Egyptian officials demanded that Qatar extradite Qaradawi. They also asked Interpol to arrest Qaradawi a year ago.

Qaradawi described the recent acquittal of ousted Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak as “the saddest day in the history of human justice and a disgrace on Egyptian judiciary.”

According to the Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Watch, Interpol issued a “red notice” which is both its highest level alert, and a move subject to later review by the international police agency.

Need For Increased Vigilance as IS Inspired Attacks Continue to Target Westerners in the Middle East

terror-threatCSP, By Matt Bauer, December 4, 2014:

As the U.S. and coalition forces continue to conduct airstrikes against the Islamic State, an alarming trend of increasing violence towards westerners is occurring in the Middle East. In recent weeks, there have been multiple attacks on abroad citizens of western coalition nations in the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt. IS ideology and influence has been seen in dozens of countries around the world, more notably countries in Europe and North America taking part of the anti-IS coalition force.

The United States, Canada, France, the UK, Germany, Austria, Australia, and many others have all been dealing with the security threats posed by Islamic radicals inspired by IS to conduct domestic attacks. There is also the threat of experienced foreign IS fighters returning to their home countries to conduct operations on behalf of IS. While these threats remain pertinent, the threat to abroad citizens of coalition countries is increasing in light of recent events.

In the UAE, an unidentified woman wearing a full niqab stabbed an American school teacher to death in a public restroom at an Abu Dhabi mall. The unidentified woman also planted a makeshift explosive device at the residence of an Egyptian-American doctor. The device was discovered and disarmed by police before it was able to cause any damage. Though the woman’s connections are still unknown, it is clear that these attacks were meant to specifically target Americans. The presence of a makeshift explosive device may indicate that the detained suspect was not acting alone. This incident is particularly alarming since it is very rare for terrorist attacks of this nature to occur in the oil-rich emirates.

In Saudi Arabia, two separate incidents occurred where a Danish and Canadian citizen were targeted. Last month, a gunman pulled up alongside the vehicle of a Danish man and opened fire. The Danish citizen was only treated for minor injuries. The perpetrators of the attack remained unknown until a recent video was released by Saudi supporters of IS claiming responsibility. The video seems to show a gunman pulling up next to a vehicle and firing multiple shots directed at the driver. The video has not yet been authenticated by authorities but seems to be consistent with attack. The video also included audio clips of IS leaders calling for attacks within Saudi Arabia.

Another incident occurred at a shopping mall in Saudi Arabia’s oil-rich Eastern Province where a Canadian man was stabbed. The assailant was arrested but the motive behind the attack is still unknown. Given the current trend and timing of the attack, it seems likely that the man was targeted because of his nationality. In Egypt, a Sinai-based terrorist group originally called Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis (ABM) but have recently changed their name to the Islamic State in Sinai, have claimed responsibility for the death of a 58-year old Texas native William Henderson. Henderson is reported to have been working for his oil company at one of their locations in Egypt and died on August 6th of this year.

The investigation into the specifics of his death is ongoing but it appears that he has been murdered solely for being an American citizen. The Islamic State of Sinai or ABM is an interesting group since they have deep ties with the Muslim Brotherhood along with their recent pledge of allegiance to IS. Egyptian authorities allege that ABM has long been funded by the Muslim Brotherhood but it is unclear under whose direction they are currently operating under.

The similarities between these separate incidents demonstrate that as the coalition fight against IS continues, western citizens visiting or living in the Middle East will continue to be targeted. It is becoming increasingly necessary for potential targeted citizens living abroad to be vigilant and aware of this very real threat. Companies and corporations who have employees at potentially dangerous foreign locations should also be aware and take the necessary steps to increase security measures to protect their facilities.

White House Label of Brotherhood as Non-Violent Patently False

Christian Copts protest the killing of their brethren by Muslim Brotherhood supporters after former President Mohammed Morsi took over office in Egypt. Morsi represented the Brotherhood's "Freedom and Justice" party. (Photo: © Reuters)

Christian Copts protest the killing of their brethren by Muslim Brotherhood supporters after former President Mohammed Morsi took over office in Egypt. Morsi represented the Brotherhood’s “Freedom and Justice” party. (Photo: © Reuters)

Facts prove the Brotherhood’s violent history. The White House itself has condemned the organization’s calls to violence.

By Ryan Mauro:

The White House has rejected a request to label the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group, describing the group as non-violent. The statement is not only at odds with known facts; it’s at odds with statements made by the White House only one year ago.

The White House statement came in response to a petition with 200,000 signatures citing the Brotherhood’s history of violence and how its preachers, particularly Sayyid Qutb, have bred multitudes of terrorists. Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates recently banned the Brotherhood as a terrorist group.

“We have not seen credible evidence that the Muslim Brotherhood has renounced its decades-long commitment to non-violence,” the White House said.

Yet, on July 8, 2013, the White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said, “We also condemn the explicit calls to violence made by the Muslim Brotherhood.”

The Alleged Brotherhood Rejection of Violence

Firstly, the White House and many Western officials are misinterpreting an alleged repudiation of violence by the Muslim Brotherhood after the execution of Brotherhood ideologue Sayyid Qutb in 1966.

The reason for the use of the word “alleged” is because there is no Muslim Brotherhood manifesto of unequivocal non-violence anywhere to be found. For all the talk of this momentous change, the Brotherhood has never produced  an authoritative declaration explaining this supposed ideological moderation.

The only cited text is a book with a translated title of “Preachers, Not Judges” or “Missionaries, Not Judges.” Sources differ as to whether it was published in 1969 or 1977, and it is said to have been written by the Muslim Brotherhood’s General Guide, Hasan al-Hudaybi, as he sat in an Egyptian prison.

The book is marked as the “moment” the Brotherhood transformed from a militant group to a non-violent educational group. It is often described as a formal rebuttal to the teachings of Sayyid Qutb.

However, top experts have concluded that the text was not even written by Al-Hudaybi, nor is there any evidence that it was written or endorsed by the Brotherhood.

One such expert is Dr. Barbara Zollner, Director of Islamic Studies at Birbeck College, University of London. Zollner wrote her doctoral thesis on the text; she also wrote a book about Al-Hudaybi.

“Overall, my argument is that Preachers, Not Judges was not written by Hassan al-Hudaybi, and secondly, it is not written as a response to Sayyid Qutb,” she says.

Zollner theorizes that the book is a product of the Egyptian government and Al-Azhar University based on the accounts of Egyptian officials and Brotherhood leaders at the time.

In fact, the book doesn’t even mention Qutb or call on Muslims to discard his preaching. Far from casting Qutb aside, the Brotherhood still exalts him and hasn’t lifted a finger to promote this alleged Al-Hudaybi text. Al-Hudaybi himself never promoted it.

On the contrary. “Qutb’s Signposts remains a standard part of the organization’s introductory membership curriculum … while Preachers, Not Judges has not been reprinted in Egypt for more than three decades and hasn’t appeared in print anywhere in the Arabic world since 1985,” explains Patrick Poole.

If this book were so seminal, the Brotherhood would at least have translated it into English and disseminated it. But, it has not, even though the Brotherhood has a frequently updated English-language website and Twitter handle.

One thing the book does is to rebut the Muslim doctrine of takfirism, a practice where Muslims declare another Muslim as an apostate without a trial or proof of treason. As can be seen historically and today, Takfirism leads to Muslim-on-Muslim violence because it enables Muslim extremists to unilaterally judge a co-religionist’s faith and essentially sentence him or her to death.

The Brotherhood and its apologists will counter that this analysis is proof that the Brotherhood proclaims non-violence today.

“The Muslim Brotherhood is committed to peaceful opposition action. It rejects all forms of violence,” it said in September.

The context of this quote is important. It was said by the Foreign Affairs Secretary of the Brotherhood’s political wing in Egypt, the Freedom and Justice Party, about  Egypt and only about Egypt.

A “Non-Violent” Group That Supports Violence Outside of Egypt

Western governments fail to understand that this stance is limited only to Egypt and is in accordance with the Brotherhood doctrine of “gradualism;” a pragmatic strategy of incremental change during periods of weakness.

Contrary to the White House’s statement, the Brotherhood does notrule out violence or terrorism entirely. In fact, it actively encourages violence in places outside of Egypt.

Tellingly, the Brotherhood’s Palestinian wing, Hamas, is officially designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the United States.

Hamas’ charter states in Part 1, Article 2 that it is “one of the wings of the Muslim Brothers in Palestine. The Muslim Brotherhood Movement is a world organization, the largest Islamic Movement in the modern era.”

In 2006, senior Brotherhood leader Essam El-Erian said, “Hamas is part of the Muslim Brotherhood.”

In 2011, Hamas officially changed its name to include, “a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood—Palestine.” The following year, a video appeared showing Hamas leaders, including Gaza Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, declaring allegiance to the Brotherhood and specifically to its jihad.

Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood have never denied their affiliation, nor have they ever condemned each other or severed ties. It is an indisputable affiliation. Former Egyptian President Morsi was actually the main liaison between Hamas and the Egyptian Brotherhood before getting into power.

The Muslim Brotherhood overtly endorses the violent destruction of Israel, suicide bombings and terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians. This fact also has never been disputed by the Brotherhood.

These facts not only discredit the White House’s position that the Brotherhood is non-violent, they discredits the White House’s position that the Brotherhood is not a terrorist group.

Read more at Clarion Project

Sisi is not Mubarak

Sisi-300x203By Caroline Glick:

It was due to Mubarak’s refusal to act that the Palestinians in Gaza were able to begin and massively expand their projectile war of mortars, rockets and missiles against Israel. From the first such attacks, carried out 14 years ago, the Palestinian projectile campaigns could never have happened without Egypt’s effective collaboration.

On countless occasions, Palestinian terrorist commanders were able to escape to Sinai and avoid arrest by Israeli forces, only to return to Gaza from Sinai and continue their operations.

Mubarak believed that Israel was his safety valve. By facilitating jihadist operations against Israel from Egyptian territory, he assumed that he was securing Egypt from them. As he saw things, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran would be so satisfied with his cooperation in their jihad against the Jews that they would leave him alone.

It was only in 2009, when Egypt announced the unraveling of a terrorist ring in Sinai comprised of Iranian Revolutionary Guards, Hamas and Hezbollah operatives planning attacks against Israel and Egypt, and seeking the overthrow of the regime, that Mubarak began signaling he may have misjudged the situation. But even then, his actions against those forces were sporadic and half-hearted.

Hamas’s continued assaults against Israel in the years that followed, and the build-up of Muslim Brotherhood and al-Qaida forces in Sinai, were a clear sign that Mubarak was unwilling to contend with the unpleasant reality that the very forces attacking Israel were also seeking to overthrow his regime and destroy the Egyptian state.

In stark contrast, Sisi rose to power as those selfsame forces were poised to destroy the Egyptian state. The Muslim Brotherhood’s rise to power owed in part to the support it received from Hamas.

During the January 2011 rebellion against Mubarak, Hamas operatives played a key role in storming Egyptian prisons in Sinai and freeing Muslim Brotherhood leaders – including Muslim Brotherhood president Mohammed Morsi – from prison. In 2012 and 2013, Hamas forces reportedly served as shock troops to quell protests against the Muslim Brotherhood regime. Those protests arose in opposition to Morsi’s moves to seize dictatorial powers Mubarak never dreamed of exercising, and his constitutional machinations aimed at transforming Egypt into an Islamic state and hub of a future global caliphate.

Sisi and his generals overthrew the Muslim Brotherhood with Saudi and UAE support in order to prevent Egypt from dissolving into a Sunni jihadist axis in which Hamas, al-Qaida and other jihadist movements were key players, and Iran and Hezbollah were allied forces.

Due to the events that propelled him to power, Sisi has adopted a strategic posture far different from Mubarak’s. As Sisi sees things, Sunni jihadist forces and their Iranian-led Shi’ite allies are existential threats to the Egyptian state even when their primary target is Israel. Sisi accepts that Israel’s fight against them directly impacts Egypt. He recognizes that when Israel is successful in defeating them, Egypt is more secure. When Israel is weak, the threat to Egypt rises.

Like Israel, Sisi acknowledges that the ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is shared by Hamas, al-Qaida and all other significant Sunni jihadist groups renders all of these groups threats to Egypt. And because of this acknowledgment, Sisi has abandoned Mubarak’s policy of enabling their war against Israel.

Not only has he abandoned Mubarak’s policy of enabling them, Sisi has acted in alliance with Israel in combating them. This is nowhere more evident than in his actions against Hamas in Gaza.

After seizing power in July 2013, Sisi immediately ordered the Egyptian military to take action to secure the border between Gaza and Sinai. To this end, for the first time, Egypt took effective, continuous steps to block the smuggling of arms and people between the two areas. These steps had a profound impact on Hamas’s regime. Hamas went to war against Israel this past summer in a bid to force Egypt and Israel to open their borders with Gaza in support of the Hamas regime and its jihadist allies.

Hamas was certain that footage of suffering in Gaza would force Egypt to oppose Israel, and so open its border with Gaza. It would also lead to US-led pressure on Israel that would make Israel succumb to Hamas’s demands.

Against all expectations, and previous precedents of Egyptian behavior under both Mubarak and Morsi, Sisi supported Israel against Hamas. Moreover, he brought both Saudi Arabia and the UAE into the unofficial alliance with Israel. The bloc he formed was powerful enough to surmount US pressure to end the war by bowing to Hamas’s demands and opening Gaza’s borders with Egypt and Israel.

Since the cease-fire came into force three months ago, Sisi has continued to seal the border. As a consequence, he has denied Hamas the ability to rebuild Gaza’s terror infrastructure. In its reduced state, Hamas is less able to facilitate the operations of its jihadist brethren in Sinai that are primarily involved in waging an insurgency against the Egyptian state.

To be sure, the most significant strategic development in recent years is the US’s strategic realignment under President Barack Obama. Under Obama the US has switched sides, supporting Iran and its allies, satellites and assets, including the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, against America’s Sunni allies and Israel.

But the alliance that emerged this summer between Israel and Egypt, with the participation of Saudi Arabia and the UAE , is also a highly significant strategic development. For the first time, a major regional power is basing its strategic posture on its understanding that the threats against itself and against Israel stem from the same sources and as a consequence, that the war against Israel is a war against it.

Israelis have argued this case for years to their Arab neighbors as well as to the Americans and other Western states. But for multiple reasons, no one has ever been willing to accept this basic, obvious reality.

As a consequence, everyone from the Americans to the Europeans to the Saudis long supported policies that empower jihadist forces against Israel.

Sisi is the first major leader to break with this consensus, as a result of actions Hamas took before and since his rise to power. He has brought Saudi Arabia and the UAE along on his intellectual journey.

Sisi’s reassessment of the relationship between the war against Israel and the war against Egypt has had a profound impact on regional realities generally and on Israel’s strategic posture specifically.

From Israel’s perspective, this is a watershed event.

The government must take every possible action, in economic and military spheres, to ensure that Sisi benefits from his actions.

The Global Jihad

3682902893By Olivier Guitta:

“Islamic extremism is a Middle East problem but it is quickly becoming the world’s problem too.  It is a transnational challenge, the most destabilizing and dangerous global force since fascism. For certain, the United States and the West have a big interest in this battle.  Now is the time to act.

Any action must begin with a clear plan for direct intervention against ISIS but must address the other dangerous extremist groups in the region.  It is also critical to tackle the support networks, the entire militant ideological and financial complex that is the lifeblood of extremism.”

Who uttered these words? President Obama, PM Cameron or President Hollande? Actually, none of them; it was the UAE Ambassador to the U.S., Yousef Al Otaiba, speaking in September 2014.

From 2001 and a time when Al-Qaeda (AQ) was perceived as our main enemy, the jihadist movement has grown in strength and in numbers. The violent jihad groups we now face include the Islamic State, Boko Haram, al Shabaab, Ansar al Sharia, al Murabitun, Ansar al Dine and AQ itself, which has expanded significantly with franchises in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), East Asia, and now the new Indian franchise as well.

Nor is the threat limited to Sunni groups but includes Shia terror outfits such as Hezbollah that, under Iranian sponsorship, are still very much active on an international scale and will stop at nothing to strike terror against the West. Geographically, the threat has grown from an Afghanistan-centered one to one that spans the globe, with a jihadist presence on nearly every continent.

The Global Jihad should be viewed from two different, but related perspectives: first, the most obvious is the doctrinally-mandated conquest of physical territory in all theaters of war; second, and just as important, is the conquest of our societies from within by way of the civilizational jihad challenges that we face. Therefore, it’s not enough to merely look at terrorist groups, because the role of intellectuals, propaganda operatives, and recruiters is actually at the root of the problem. Jihad groups should be viewed and approached through that prism.

Fighting against the global jihad cannot be effective if focused only on the “armies” but must also confront the “brains” behind them: let’s not forget that inciting terrorism has a multiplying effect.

The Islamic State

Surging to power across national borders in 2014, the Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) has become a household name and supplanted al-Qaeda (AQ) as the vanguard of the global jihadist movement. ISIS announced in June 2014 the establishment of a new Caliphate in Syria and Iraq and changed its name to the “Islamic State (IS)” to signify its global ambitions, claim the allegiance of Muslims everywhere, and emphasize its non-recognition of Western-drawn political boundaries. It also seeks allegiance from jihadist group worldwide and rapidly is winning support from Muslim followers and recruits from over 80 countries around the world.

IS victories in Syria and its spectacular advances in Iraq from Mosul to the fringes of Baghdad, and even advancing to the Saudi and Jordanian borders, have made IS the new “kid on the block”. In mid-September 2014, its Chechen members threatened to march on Amman, Jordan’s capital, while Saudi’s military forces are on high alert for advances toward Mecca and Medina.

By calling itself the Islamic State with no mention of countries, IS leader al-Baghdadi is seeking to bring to his fold all groups that view al-Zawahiri’s brand as passé and see al-Baghdadi as the true inheritor of Osama Bin Laden’s global vision. This is why in the past months, thousands of jihadists around the world announced they were switching allegiances to the Islamic State. The Islamic State’s fighters are young, fluent on social media platforms like Twitter and Instagram, and, unlike al-Qaeda, they are actually setting up the Caliphate and governing captured territory.

Read more at Center for Security Policy

Olivier Guitta is a security and geopolitical risk consultant to corporations and governments. He tweets@OlivierGuitta.

Man arrested for threatening Ferguson police may have ties to radical group lauded by CAIR

756328842CSP, by Kyle Shideler:

A Washington State man arrested for issuing interstate threats targeting Ferguson Police officer Darren Wilson may have ties to the radical Islamist group known as “Al-Ummah” led by Jamil Abdullah Amin and Luqman Abdullah, two radical imams recently lauded by a Council on American Islamic Relations representative on a phone conference for the Muslims for Ferguson group as reported by Fox News.

Jaleel Tariq Abdul-Jabber, a Kirkland, Washington man and former convicted felon, was arrested for allegedly threatening to murder police in connection to ongoing protests in Ferguson, Missouri. Abdul-Jabber, whose social media profile indicates that he self-identifies as a Muslim, reportedly wrote numerous threats targeting Ferguson Police officer Darren Wilson, as well as other law enforcement officers. According to press reports the complaint alleges that Abdul-Jabber engaged in making “interstate threats,” including:

“Then we can find where that cop’s child goes to school at and hope that the same can be returned back to that white [racial slur],” he allegedly wrote according to the charging documents. On Aug. 30, Abdul-Jabbaar allegedly reposted a news report claiming video surveillance contradicted the official story of what had happened during the Ferguson shooting, writing “we really need to start killing the police.” Other messages and posts included “I would love to smoke a white motha [expletive] cop,” as well as “We the oppressed people need to kill this white cop” along with a repost of a news story containing Wilson’s address. On Nov. 11, Abdul-Jabbaar allegedly wrote “Are there any REAL BLACK MEN that would love to go down to Ferguson Missouri to give back those bullets to Police Officer [D.W.] fired into the body of Mike Brown. If we’re unable to locate Officer [D.W.], then We’ll return them to his wife and if not her then his children.”

In response to a news article relating the story of two FBI agents shot while serving a warrant in Ferguson, Abdul-Jabber wrote, “this is how you put your work in, thats what the f*** I’m talk’n about.”

“Put in work” is a slang term often used to refer to engaging in illegal or criminal activity, typically on behalf of a crew or gang.

Abdul-Jabber’s social media profile indicates he was born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. One of the groups joined by Abdul-Jabber on Facebook is a Philadelphia Mosque, the Majilis Ashura of Philadelphia and the Delaware Valley, which was a co-sponsor of a 2011 event entitled “A CONVERSATION ON THE LIFE AND LEGACY OF IMAM JAMIL ABDULLAH AL-AMIN — The former H. Rap Brown.”  A Facebook page established for Imam Jamil Abdullah Amin lists Abdul-Jabber as a friend, while Abdul-Jabber’s Facebook friends list has apparently been purged. A post on the Majilis Ashura Facebook page from November 5th of this year features a youtube video posted by one of the Masjid’s Imams, showing young men conducting firearms drills.

 

Additionally,Majilis Ashura also lists on its website a connection to the Jawala Scouts, an Islamic paramilitary youth group, which engages in firearms training, survival skills, and hand to hand combat training. A Facebook page established for the Jawala Scouts lists Abdul-Jabber as a friend. The Jawala Scouts are associated with Luqman Al-Haq, aka Kenny Gamble, being registered at the same physical space as his Universal Muslim Movement office space with his United Muslim Masjid organization. Gamble is a famed former musician, but also known for allegedly attempting to create a Muslim-only enclave in Philadelphia. Gamble sits on the board of the Muslim Alliance of North America (MANA), together with the (now deceased) Luqman Abdullah, and Jamil Abdullah Amin was instrumental in the founding of MANA according to webpage dedicated to Amin:

Last month, on a balmy, spring day in Philadelphia, 18 Muslim leaders met and resolved to further the process of establishing a new national organization–the Muslim Alliance in North America (MANA). The purpose of MANA as stated in its mission statement is to pursue an agenda that reflects the points of view and experiences of the indigenous Muslims of North America and one that addresses their needs and aspirations. The effort to form an alliance for indigenous Muslims is not new. MANA is merely part of the continuing struggle to unite Muslims in America. However, this particular initiative began almost two years ago when Imam Jamil Al-Amin made a call for the formation of such an alliance.

In addition to his support for Al-Amin, and ties to the paramilitary Jawala Scouts linked to Gamble, on November 28th, Abdul-Jabbar shared a link to the CAIR-Washington Chapter  Facebook Page discussing CAIR efforts to encourage Muslims not to talk to Federal Law Enforcement. A similar story, also by CAIR, was shared on the Muslims for Ferguson Facebook group on the same day that the call discussed the FBI shooting which killed Imam Luqman Abdullah.

Although there is no immediate evidence to suggest that Abdul-Jabber was a participant in the Muslims for Ferguson phone conference (he is not listed as a supporter on the group’s facebook page, although several other members of the Masjid Ashura of Philadelphia facebook group were), there is reason to suspect that Abdul-Jabber may have some connection to the Al-Ummah group. The possibility that Abdul-Jabber may have ties to a group training for future conflict with law enforcement deserved deeper investigation by the appropriate authorities.

The threat of violence from radicalized elements in the African American Muslim community remains present. As we have previously reported, Zale Thompson -who was shot and killed while attacking NYPD officers with a hatchet- also expressed support for the Al-Ummah Imam by featuring multiple Jamil Abdullah Amin videos in a youtube video playlist linked to his account.

Given the willingness and ability of Al-Amin followers to engage in violence, CAIR’s efforts to link Al-Ummah leader Luqman Abdullah with the Ferguson protests continues to represent a very real potential threat to the safety of local, state and federal law enforcement.

Canadian Watchdog Report Chastises RCMP for Islamist Engagement

1098by John Rossomando
IPT News
November 24, 2014

A new report by Canada’s Point de Bascule takes the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) to task for participating in a panel discussion Wednesday sponsored by the Muslim Students Association (MSA) at the University of Windsor. RCMP Superintendent Doug Best, who heads the Canadian law-enforcement agency’s national security operations in Ontario, will appear alongside two Canadian Islamists.

“The upcoming event in Windsor is the latest example of an increasing and dangerous collaboration between Canada’s security agencies and Islamists linked to the Muslim Brotherhood infrastructure,” the Point de Bascule report says.

The program, “Violent Radicalization and It Impact on Muslims,” also features two speakers with a history of supporting radical Islamists. One of those speakers is Muhammed Robert Heft who recently met with Taliban officials in Qatar in hopes of getting the Taliban to stand against the Islamic State. The other radical Islamist is law professor Faisal Kutty has been a spokesman for two charities accused of al-Qaida ties.

The host organization, MSA, was founded in 1963 by Muslim Brotherhood members at the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana. It served as the organizational base from which the Islamist movement in North America sprang. A 2007 New York Police Department report found that extremists use MSAs as “forums for the development and recruitment of like-minded individuals.”

Numerous individuals with MSA ties have been convicted or charged with terrorism-related offenses.

“However, if we look carefully at the organizations that they support and the goal that they pursue, they are indistinguishable from those defended by violent Islamists,” said Marc Lebuis, director of Point de Bascule. “In fact, Islamists waging violent jihad and those waging what they call themselves the “jihad of the tongue” are executing a good cop/bad cop routine in front of our very eyes.”

The “jihad of the tongue” involves calling non-believers to Islam, and it can accompany a military or political struggle. Muslim Brotherhood ideologue Sheik Yusuf al-Qaradawi contends that this sort of jihad can be waged by “calling others to Islam, highlighting the merits of Islam and preaching in the language of the target audience.”

Qaradawi also notes that this “collective jihad of da’awah (Islamic preaching)” precedes military jihad.

The Hamas Charter similarly endorses the jihad of the tongue as a prong of its offensive against Israel and the Jews, Lebuis said.

“Jihad is not confined to the carrying of arms and the confrontation of the enemy. The effective word, the good article, the useful book, support and solidarity – together with the presence of sincere purpose for the hoisting of Allah’s banner higher and higher – all these are elements of the Jihad for Allah’s sake,” Hamas says in Article 30 of its 1988 charter.

Point de Bascule, a non-profit watchdog group that monitors the activities and operations of radical Islamic groups in Canada, warns that if those waging the “jihad of the tongue” on Canada’s security infrastructure succeed, it will make the “task of neutralizing violent jihadists almost impossible.”

The fruits of this engagement include a 2009 RCMP document “Words Make Worlds” that discourages police officers from using Islamic concepts to describe the Islamist threat. Michel Coulombe, director of Canada’s Security Intelligence Service, testified in February that his agency prefers to refer to jihadism as “terrorism inspired by Al-Qaida ideology” rather than invoking Islamic terminology.

It’s not a notion that will be challenged by the others on Wednesday’s Windsor panel.

Muhammed Robert Heft is a Toronto-based convert imam who has advised the RCMP, Canadian parliamentarians along with U.S. and Australian government agencies counter-terrorism issues. Heft helped create a “Specialized De-Radicalization Intervention Program” modeled on Alcoholics Anonymous to work with radicalized Muslim youth. He also founded P4E Support Group, which states on its website that it exists to “assist Muslims converts.”

Heft portrays himself as a moderate; however, his Facebook page raises questions about that. Earlier this month, Heft travelled to Doha, Qatar to meet with Taliban representatives at their “embassy” there.

“Please pray for the success of my mission. I am meeting with the head of the Taliban Embassy in Doha, Qatar and we are working on a treaty that would state clearly that the Taliban (Mujahideen) don’t condone vigilante violence, Criminal acts or Terrorism in Non Muslim Countries. They have agreed to take it to Mullah Omar,” Heft wrote Oct. 24. “This will hopefully put some doubt as to the legitimacy of ISIS and there(sic) Fatwas about killing indiscriminately.”

He said that he had been in communication with the Taliban for the previous six months leading up to his announcement.

Such sentiments ignore the Taliban’s history of indiscriminate killing of innocents and its support for Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida both before and since 9/11. Al-Qaida Emir Ayman Al-Zawahiri pledges his loyalty to Mullah Omar.

Canada’s government added the Taliban to its list of terrorist organizations in 2013, noting that the terrorist group mostly relies on suicide bombings and improvised-explosive devices to kill indiscriminately.

Heft’s Facebook page links to the website of Zakir Naik, a Muslim televangelist banned from entering Canada in 2010.

Naik described Jews as “our staunchest enemy” and endorsed Osama Bin Laden,saying:” If [Osama bin Laden] is fighting the enemies of Islam, I am for him … If he is terrorizing a terrorist, if he is terrorizing America the terrorist, the biggest terrorist, I am with him.”

Faisal Kutty, the third panelist at the MSA event, is a Valparaiso University law professor in Indiana..

Kutty served on the board of Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) Canada office and worked as a spokesman for the World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY), a radical Saudi funded organization and the Benevolence International Foundation (BIF) – both organizations linked to al-Qaida and Osama bin Laden.

Kutty told journalists that BIF “provides succor for the needy, not help for terrorists” and denied that Benevolence International Foundation had ties to Al-Qaida in October 2001, according to the Point de Bascule report.

The United Nations added BIF to its list of Taliban and al-Qaida supporting entities in November 2002, noting its active support for Bin Laden’s activities in Bosnia, Pakistan, China, Chechnya and Russia. Three months later, BIF director Enaam Arnaout entered a plea agreement for diverting charitable donations to jihadists.

Kutty publicly defended WAMY in October 2001, telling a Canadian newspaper it was a “very respected organization” and that people “would be shocked” to hear allegations linking it with al-Qaida. But a Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) audit released in 2011 found that WAMY had served as “primary of Al-Qaida financial and fundraising activity” in 1993 and that it “served a critical role in the Arab-Afghan terrorist infrastructure.”

Furthermore, in 2003, David Kane, a special agent with U.S. Customs Service, signed an affidavit in which he revealed numerous radical, racist and terrorist activities supported by WAMY, including active support for Hamas’ terrorist wing. Kane also cited the fact that WAMY published many books for Muslim youth promoting hatred of Christians and Jews. Kane quoted from one book as follows:

“[T]he seed of the Gulf-war was planted by a Jew; the Jews are enemies of the faithful, God and the angels; The Jews are humanity’s enemies; they foment immorality in this world; The Jews are deceitful, they say something but mean the exact opposite; Who was behind the biological crisis which became like brain washing? A Jew; Who was behind the disintegration of family life and values? A Jew; The one that stirred-up hate and turned the individuals against their Muslim governments in the Arab peninsula – a Jew; Who promoted Atheism and made the countries thrive on Muslims’ blood? The Jews; Every tragedy that inflicts the Muslims is caused by the Jews.”

More recently, Kutty downplayed the role Islam plays in motivating jihadists. In a Nov. 22 column in the Windsor Star, he blamed “mental illness” for jihadist terrorist acts, including that of Parliament Hill shooter Michel Zehaf-Bibeau.

“In fact, a few ‘radicals’ that I have counselled were diagnosed schizophrenics,” Kutty wrote.

The report shows that , the RCMP fallen into the same trap as some U.S. law enforcement agencies in that have established close relations with radical Islamist groups who pretend to be moderate. The danger is that the RCMP legitimizes militant groups and radicals who should be shunned rather than dignified as respected moderate allies of the Canadian government in its war against war against Islamic terrorism.

By embracing Islamic extremists who masquerade as moderates, the RCMP effectively has ostracized genuine Islamic moderates in Canada who deserve recognition for their courage in speaking out against the terrorists.

Read the full Point de Bascule report here.