“Turn Your Islamic Centers, Mosques into Registration Centers for Voters”

CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad says Muslims can be the “swing vote” in the 2016 elections. (Image source: YouTube)

CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad says Muslims can be the “swing vote” in the 2016 elections. (Image source: YouTube)

Frontpage, by Daniel Greenfield, Jan. 27, 2016:

The last time the Muslim Brotherhood got involved in an election, it ended with a tyranny, church burnings, terrorism, a civil war, mass sexual assaults on women and a popular uprising against it.

Presumably the local Muslim Brotherhood crew is hoping for a better outcome in the United Statesthan they ended up with in Egypt, as Sharona Schwartz at The Blaze Reports.

The head of the Council on American-Islamic Relations said that Muslims could comprise the swing vote in the presidential elections if 1 million of them register to vote, as he urged them to turn mosques into polling stations this November.

“I believe we have at least 1 million Muslim eligible voters in this country. We have to register every single Muslim to vote in 2016. The Muslim vote can be the swing vote in major states,” CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad said at the Muslim American Society (MAS) and Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) annual conference in Chicago, according to video posted earlier this month.

Awad explained that CAIR — which is prohibited from engaging in political activity due to its registration as a tax-exempt organization — would not be the vehicle by which a candidate would be endorsed. He said another organization would be set up to promote the Muslim-friendly presidential candidate.

Awad urged all Muslims to register to vote and to use Islamic centers as polling stations.

“Turn your centers, Islamic centers, mosques into registration centers for voters, into polling stations during the election time,” he said.

So CAIR, already an unindicted terror coconspirator, will try to dodge the law again. And let’s recall who Nihad Awad is and what he stands for.

In fact, Awad publicly declared “I am in support of the Hamas movement,” during a March 1994 symposium at Barry University.

Sure. Let’s let this guy and his group try to influence the outcome of an American election. What could possibly go wrong?

Jihadist Saudi Cleric on U.S. No Fly List: MAS-ICNA Conference Organizers “Frustrated”

Photo of page 8 from MAS-ICNA 14th Annual Convention program book showing Saudi Sheikh Ayed Al-Qarni slated to speak with Tariq Ramadan on Saturday, 26 December 2015.

Photo of page 8 from MAS-ICNA 14th Annual Convention program book showing Saudi Sheikh Ayed Al-Qarni slated to speak with Tariq Ramadan on Saturday, 26 December 2015.

Center for Security Policy, December 28, 2015:

While Americans are celebrating the Christmas holiday with their families, United States Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO) members—Muslim American Society (MAS) and Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA)—are hosting the 14th Annual MAS-ICNA Convention from 25-28 December 2015 at the McCormick Place in Chicago, Illinois. Perhaps hoping for a bit of a slip stream from Christmas, the USCMO chose for this year’s theme “Muhammad: Peace Be Upon Him, Mercy to Mankind.”

The Muslim Brotherhood political action group suffered a setback, though, when Saudi cleric Sheikh Ayed al-Qarni was denied entry into the United States and prevented from boarding his U.S. connecting flight from Istanbul, Turkey. In an email issued by MAS-Chicago on 24 December 2015, the convention organizers expressed “dismay and frustration” that one of their key speakers would be a no-show, but did not elaborate about why Sheikh al-Qarni finds himself on a U.S. No Fly list.

Screenshot of 24 December 2015 E-Mail from MAS-Chicago

Screenshot of 24 December 2015 E-Mail from MAS-Chicago

It is likely, though, that both Sheikh Al-Qarni and the USCMO know full well why his name is on a U.S. No Fly list.

On 21 December 2015, during a press conference that followed an emergency national summit of Muslim Brotherhood leadership in the wake of the San Bernardino jihadist massacre, the USCMO announced that one of its campaign goals was to “enhance national security” in the United States. Yet, even as the USCMO advances under the banner of a “Star Spangled Shariah”, its leadership was planning for Sheikh Al-Qarni to address the Muslim Brotherhood faithful gathered in Chicago from around the world, despite a public record showing that he urges violent jihad and admits to praying daily for America’s destruction.

Previously, in December 2012 at the 11th Annual MAS-ICNA convention in Chicago, then-future USCMO founding member Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR, the U.S. branch of HAMAS) came to the defense of al-Qarni by protesting his exclusion from entering the U.S. In an interview with an Arabic language news outlet, CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad stated, “We defend all Muslims who are subject to arbitrary measures, and by this logic, we will act but not formally plead, unless we obtain authorization from him.”

The Muslim Brotherhood described Al-Qarni in 2012 as a “renowned Muslim scholar and inspirational speaker. Known for his logical discourse and balanced views, he promotes understanding and collaboration between all people, regardless of their faith, background, or language.” The laudatory tone here belies the reality of a Saudi cleric with a long history of inciting jihad against the U.S, Israel, Christians, and Jews.

According to Congressional testimony from Steven Emerson and Jonathan Levin before the United States Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, entitled “Terrorism Financing: Origination, Organization, and Prevention: Saudi Arabia, Terrorist Financing and the War on Terror”, the U.S. government learned in 2003,

“There is growing evidence of Wahhabi activities in Iraq. Last month’s issue of The Future of Islam, a monthly [WAMY publication]…carried a cover interview with Saudi cleric Ayed al-Qarni. Al-Qarni, an adviser to Prince Abdel-Aziz bin Fahd, youngest son of Saudi Arabia’s King Fahd, stated that he prays for the destruction of America several times a day. He also urged Saudi subjects to go and fight in Iraq or contribute money.”

Further, the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) flagged a 2005 sermon, in which al-Qarni described jihad against American forces in Fallujah as

“a source of pride, downing their planes, destroying equipment, slaughtering them, taking them hostage, and proclaiming ‘Allah Akhbar’ from the mosques, and the worshippers and the preacher cursing them in their prayers…throats must be slit and skulls shattered…”

Although USCMO members since 2014 have gathered in solidarity at anti-American and antisemitic demonstrations in Chicago and elsewhere across the U.S., Al-Qarni previously mocked Muslims for their failure to take action in “harming the Jews.” Invoking his hatred for Israel’s targeted killing of HAMAS leaders Ahmed Yassin and Abdel-Aziz Rantisi, Al-Qarni has prayed that Allah

“will destroy the Jews and their helpers from among the Christians and the Communists, and that He will turn them into the Muslims’ spoils. I praise the Jihad, the sacrifice, and the resistance against the occupiers in Iraq. We curse them all of them every night and pray that Allah will annihilate them, tear them apart, and grant us victory over them…”

As the Muslim Brotherhood’s USCMO launches its 2016 U.S. election cycle campaign, is “One America” really its theme or are directives from Al-Qarni such as this: “Throats must be slit and skulls must be shattered…This is the path to victory, to shahada, and to sacrifice”? Which is it?

It remains to be seen if MAS and/or CAIR under the auspices of USCMO leadership will once again protest Al-Qarni’s continued ban from entering the U.S. with complaints to the Department of Homeland Security and Department of State. On the one hand, feigned ignorance about the legitimate reasons for his ban serves the Brotherhood’s contrived image of benign Muslim advocacy—but on the other, Al-Qarni’s open incitement to jihad violence is a matter of public record. His invitation to speak at this year’s MAS-ICNA conference must therefore expose yet again the brazen hypocrisy of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood, which poses under the patriotic imagery of a “Star Spangled Shariah” while in fact remaining steadfast in its “civilizational jihad” to “destroy the Western civilization from within…”

While it might have been educational to hear what Al-Qarni would have told the Muslim Brotherhood faithful gathered in Chicago this weekend, the MAS-ICNA invitation itself to an openly jihadist Islamic supremacist speaks volumes about the unity of purpose among al-Qa’eda (a Muslim Brotherhood off-shoot), the Islamic State (an al-Qa’eda affiliate), and the Muslim Brotherhood itself, which has been called the “granddaddy of them all.” If USCMO Secretary General Oussama Jammal and his leadership believe Al-Qarni, who has been described as influential among Al-Qa’eda followers, has an important message to disseminate to the Muslim Brotherhood following in North America, thousands of whom will be in attendance at the 2015 MAS-ICNA Conference, this should serve as a clear indicator and warning of the reality of the Global Jihad Movement we face. It is not just the violent jihad groups that threaten our choice to live free of jihad and shariah, but also all who support the ideology of Islamic supremacism.

IPT Exclusive: Witnesses Say CAIR’s Hamas/MB Links Cemented From Start

IPT News
December 14, 2015:

1303Like a good politician, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) repeatedly proves adept at inserting itself into national debates.

When presidential candidate Ben Carson said he could not support a Muslim president, CAIR gathered reporters to express outrage and call on Carson to drop out of the race. When a 14-year-old Texas boy was detained for bringing what he said was a homemade clock to school that a teacher feared might be a bomb, a CAIR official expressed outrage and sat by the boy’s side during news conferences and interviews.

And in the immediate aftermath of the Dec. 2 mass killings in San Bernardino by a radicalized Muslim man and his wife, CAIR called a news conference where its top Los Angeles official “unequivocally” condemned the killings.

CAIR’s aggressive approach, and a combination of media ignorance or laziness, generates uncritical television and newspaper stories throughout the country. This helps the organization reinforce its self-anointed and incorrect reputation as the voice for America’s roughly 2 million Muslims. CAIR is presented as a responsible, moderate organization.

But when cracks appear in that façade, journalists rarely rise to the occasion. Less than two days later, the same CAIR official who unequivocally condemned the San Bernardino killings appeared on CNN to blame “our foreign policy” for fueling radicalization that leads to such violence.

In blaming the United States for an attack by radical Islamists, CAIR- Los Angeles director Hussam Ayloush picked up talking points CAIR officials pushed in the wake of last month’s ISIS massacres in Paris. The aim is to keep the killers’ religious motivations out of any conversation.

“We are partly responsible,” Ayloush said about the United States. “Terrorism is a global problem, not a Muslim problem. And the solution has to be global. Everyone has a role in it.”

Anchor Chris Cuomo did not challenge this statement.

Such uncritical news coverage comes despite a well-documented record establishing CAIR’s own ties to terrorists. Internal Muslim Brotherhood records obtained by the FBI place CAIR and its founders at the core of a Brotherhood-created Hamas support network in the United States. It is a history so checkered that formal FBI policy since 2008 bars interaction with its officials except in criminal investigations.

On Thursday, CAIR legislative director Corey Saylor told the Wall Street Journal that the alleged Hamas ties were “put to rest by the Department of Justice in 2011 and now exists as an Internet story.”

This is a lie. Saylor knows that the FBI policy toward CAIR remains in effect, and it waspublicly reaffirmed in 2013. And there simply is no way to “put to rest” the internal records admitted into evidence in 2008.

FBI records recently obtained by the Investigative Project on Terrorism further illustrate why CAIR merits closer scrutiny, rather than free air time, from the mainstream media. The records cement CAIR’s connections to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas from its very foundation, including disclosures about the only executive director CAIR has ever had – Nihad Awad.

Before he helped create CAIR 21 years ago, Awad moved from Dallas to Washington, D.C. “in order to represent Hamas,” an acquaintance said.

Awad’s co-founder Omar Ahmad sought the blessing of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt to proceed with the new political start-up. That approval went as far as getting the global Islamist movement’s blessing over CAIR’s bylaws.

These accounts came from separate sources, each of whom ran in the same Islamist circles as Awad and Ahmad, during interviews with the FBI in 2005 and in 2009-10. They were among more than 1,000 pages of FBI records released to the IPT, via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. The IPT sought records from the 2010deportation of another CAIR official, former national board member Nabil Sadoun.

Sadoun’s deportation resulted at least in part from his “connections to HAMAS, HAMAS leader Mousa Abu Marzook, and HAMAS front organizations,” papers filed in Immigration Court show. Sadoun was a longtime CAIR national board member and served as president of the Muslim Arab Youth Association (MAYA), the 1,013-page FOIA response shows.

“MAYA served as a conduit for money to HAMAS, through the HLF [Holy Land Foundation], and served as a forum where HAMAS could promote its ideology and recruit new members,” a February 2010 declaration filed in Sadoun’s deportation casesaid. He also made anti-Semitic statements and advocated for violent jihad during an interview in a MAYA publication. (For more on Sadoun, click here)

Read more

Don Lemon Is Wrong About CAIR

d455913e-196d-4a67-9033-7e65be8d909c (1)Town Hall, by Kyle Shideler, Dec. 11, 2015:

CNN Host Don Lemon attempted to invoke the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) as part of his televised ambush of former Reagan official and head of Center for Security Policy Frank Gaffney last night.  Lemon played a clip of Nihad Awad, CAIR’s Executive Director, before asking why Gaffney opposed CAIR. When Gaffney attempted to explain that CAIR was a Muslim Brotherhood organization with ties to Hamas, Lemon flatly denied it saying, “There is no direct knowledge that we had that CAIR has anything to do with the Muslim brotherhood.”

It should be understood from the outset that CAIR’s ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and to Hamas, are absolutely indisputable. Anyone who baldly asserts to the contrary, as Lemon does, is either totally ignorant of the available facts or is lying.

CAIR was founded in 1994 by three men, Nihad Awad, Omar Ahmad, and Rafiq Jaber. All three men were leading members of the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP). IAP is described in documents recovered by the FBI and submitted into evidence at the Holy Land Foundation Trial as an organization of the Palestine Committee of the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States.

A 1991 Memorandum entitled, “A Suggestion to Amend the bylaws of the Central Committee,” and submitted at trial as Elbarasse Search-7 described IAP as the “official organization” representing the “popular side” of the Palestine Committee’s efforts. Remarks listed at the bottom of the page openly describe collecting donations for the “Islamic Resistance Movement” (AKA Hamas) “from the Ikhwan and others.” Ikhwan is Arabic for brothers and used to refer to Brotherhood members.

IAP is also connected directly to the Muslim Brotherhood, the Palestine Committee, and Hamas in the 1992 “Islamic Action for Palestine” memo, introduced into evidence as “Elbarasse Search 5. That memo describes the goal of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee as supporting jihad in Palestine, and in particular Hamas, with “media, money, men and all that.”

Deported Hamas operative, and now Deputy Chairman of Hamas’ Political Bureau Mousa Abu Marzook was  IAP Chairman, and the FBI submitted evidence at trial showing that Marzook had supplied IAP with tens of thousands of dollars.

The U.S Government’s Trial brief for the Holy Land Foundation succinctly described IAP as a “media and propaganda organization” of the Palestine Committee.

CAIR Founder Omar Ahmad, and Nihad Awad both appear in the “Palestine Section” Phone Directory introduced into evidence as “Ashqar Search 1.” Ahmad’s name appears under the name Omar Yahya, an alias Ahmad admitted to using.

In 1993, members of the Palestine Committee and its affiliated organizations held a meeting in Philadelphia that was placed under surveillance by the FBI. The FBI recorded open statements about Hamas, including under the code phrase “Sister Samah.” Hamas spelled backwards, as testified to by FBI Agent Lara Burns.

Burns would also testify that CAIR was formed in the aftermath of the Philadelphia meeting.

Omar Ahmad and Nihad Awad were both present at the 1993 meeting according to the FBI. Omar Ahmad spoke at the meeting (recorded and entered into evidence as Philly Meeting 15E) about working in the media, and said the problem was that the committee had “stopped working underground,” and that deception was needed, “the media person among us will recognize that you send two messages; one to the Americans and one to the Muslims.”

Following CAIR’s creation, the organization’s name appeared on a handwritten document titled, “Meeting Agenda for the Palestine Committee 7/30/94” seized in a search by the FBI and submitted at trial as Elbarasse Search-19.

Looking at the sum total of all of the submitted evidence during the Holy Land Foundation Trial, Federal Judge Jorge Solis declared that, “The government has produced ample evidence to establish connections” between CAIR, IAP and the terrorist organization Hamas.

Shortly after CAIR’s founding in 1994, Nihad Awad, CAIR’s executive director, wasvideotaped publicly declaring support for Hamas.

In response to a CAIR filed amicus brief in the appellate case against

Sabri Benkahla, the government’s brief responded by noting, “…from its founding by Muslim Brotherhood leaders, CAIR conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists.”

The Federal Bureau of Investigation responded to a request for information from then Senator John Kyl and other lawmakers about CAIR by saying that it had cut off contact with CAIR’s National Headquarters because “evidence was introduced that demonstrated a relationship among CAIR, individual CAIR founders (including its current President Emeritus [Omar Ahmad] and its Executive Director [Nihad Awad]) and the Palestine Committee.”

The evidence of CAIR’s participation in a conspiracy to support Hamas through its role as a member of the Palestine Committee of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood is unassailable. The evidence that the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood exists as a real and knowable network of individuals and organizations is likewise unassailable.

It can only be either ignored, or responded to by attacking the messenger.

Which is exactly the route CNN and Don Lemon chose to take.

The Façade in CAIR’s Paris Attacks Condemnation

cair-terror-shadowIPT News
November 16, 2015

Leaders at the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) condemn Friday’s coordinated terrorist attacks in Paris that left an estimated 130 people dead. They really, really condemn it.

But if the discussion turns to the terrorists’ religious motivations, they’ll condemn that, too. Beginning with social media posts and a news conference with leaders of other Muslim organizations Saturday, CAIR is waging a campaign to stifle any reference to the Islamist ideology that drove the Islamic State attack on Paris.

If defeating ISIS requires a war of ideas among Muslims to determine how literally to apply the Quran, CAIR wants no part.

“Let’s not legitimize ISIS and help them in their propaganda by calling them the Islamic State,” CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad told reporters.” They’re not Islamic. They’re not state. They’re anti-Islamic. Let’s not call them jihadis. They have nothing to do with jihad. Jihad is a legitimate self-defense in Islam. Let’s not give them this legitimizing title. They are brutal killers. They have no legitimacy.

“And I urge media, politicians, analysts to be very careful with the choice of their words. ISIS is appealing to the marginalized, disenfranchised and alienated young people in the Middle East and in the West. Let’s not help ISIS recruit more disenfranchised and alienated young people.”

It’s an argument directly contradicted by ISIS itself and one being mocked both by Islamic radicals and by secular advocates of religious freedom.

In a statement claiming credit for Friday’s slaughter re-posted at the Long War Journal, ISIS described the attacks as “a blessed battle whose causes of success were enabled by Allah” to strike “the capital of prostitution and vice, the lead carrier of the cross in Europe — Paris.”

“This group of believers were youth who divorced the worldly life and advanced towards their enemy hoping to be killed for Allah’s sake, doing so in support of His religion,” the ISIS statement said. “…The targets included the Bataclan theatre for exhibitions, where hundreds of pagans gathered for a concert of prostitution and vice.”

CAIR, meanwhile, created a Twitter hashtag, “TerrorismHasNoReligion,” and sent the director of its Florida chapters, Hassan Shibly, onto the radio, where he essentially blamed the victims. It isn’t religion that drove the attacks, he said. Rather, it is the consequence of “failing foreign policy” by Western nations including France and the United States.

1266In a four-minute segment, Shibly made seven references to foreign policy, describing it as “bad” and “horrific.” Fix the foreign policy, he said, and the terrorism will end. The problem is, “We cannot have a real conversation about terrorism these days.”

Terrorists, he told host Dean Obeidallah, “are not motivated by religion. They’re motivated by politics, by fighting for power and their own political agenda and they use religion to galvanize support. But ultimately, it isn’t about the religion. An absence of religion but still with the same political issues, you would still have the same problems. So it’s about politics, not religion.”

This is an argument wholly divorced from any facts about the Paris attacks or about ISIS’s ideology. We have cited numerous examples in which Islamist terrorists clearly describe their actions as religiously-inspired. And now, ISIS and its supporters provide fresh examples contradicting CAIR’s very premise.

In a sickly sarcastic essay, “Sorry Paris,” Salafi-jihadist ideologue Hussain bin Mahmud ridicules “our respectable and venerable ‘scholars’ who opened their mouth faster than the speed of light to condemn those criminal events.”

Mahmud’s beefs are about a perceived Western disrespect for Islam:

Sorry Paris, we have forgotten your enmity towards our religion, your insults towards our Lord and His messenger peace be upon him, your efforts to change our cultures in our countries, and suppressing Islam from the hearts of the young people in the East and the West.. Sorry Paris.

On the other side of the spectrum, Iraqi-born secularist Faisal Saeed Al Mutar likens arguments like CAIR’s to a Monty Python sketch depicting an Islamist terrorist arguing with an apologist:

“We did this because our holy texts exhort us to do it.”

“No you didn’t.”

“Wait, what? Yes we did…”

“No, this has nothing to do with religion. You guys are just using religion as a front for social and geopolitical reasons.”

“WHAT!? Did you even read our official statement? We give explicit Quranic justification. This is jihad, a holy crusade against pagans, blasphemers, and disbelievers.”

Read the entire script here.

In its statement claiming credit for the Paris attacks, ISIS refers to its grievances with the “crusader” nations, but makes a point of emphasizing religion. Those countries “will continue to be at the top of the target list for the Islamic State and that the scent of death will not leave their nostrils as long as they partake in the crusader campaign, as long as they dare to curse our Prophet (blessings and peace be upon him), and as long as they boast about their war against Islam in France and their strikes against Muslims in the lands of the Caliphate with their jets, which were of no avail to them in the filthy streets and alleys of Paris.”

It starts with a Surah in which Allah “cast terror into their hearts so they destroyed their houses by their own hands and the hands of the believers.”

Never mind that, CAIR says. It insists religion should not be part of the conversation.

But despite the protestations, acknowledging the words and ideals that fuel terrorists in no way indicts the belief of the world’s billion Muslims or the ideals of any broad spectrum of American Muslims. That is a false argument intended to shut down the debate before it starts.

During his interview, Shibly and Obeidallah mocked the argument that terrorists hate us for our culture, for our freedom. As the ISIS statement shows, it views Paris as “the capital of prostitution and vice, the lead carrier of the cross in Europe.”

According to Shibly, that really means they hate French and American foreign policy.

“There’s hundreds of other countries in the world that have the freedoms we have but that don’t have the problems we have,” he said. “We do need to start asking ourselves how is our failed foreign policy leading to the troubles that we are seeing today while recognizing that the actions of terrorists is never justifiable.”

In a speech last July, British Prime Minister David Cameron rejected the notion that discussions about Islamic theology fueling terrorism be avoided.

It doesn’t work, Cameron said, in part “because these extremists are self-identifying as Muslims. The fact is from Woolwich to Tunisia, from Ottawa to Bali, these murderers all spout the same twisted narrative, one that claims to be based on a particular faith.”

Minimizing debate is counter-productive, he added, because there are voices advocating reform who challenge “the fusing of religion and politics, the voices that want to challenge the scriptural basis which extremists claim to be acting on…the voices that are crucial in providing an alternative worldview that could stop a teenager’s slide along the spectrum of extremism.”

These voices lack the profile and money the terrorists have at their disposal.

Perhaps Shibly and his colleagues at CAIR are targeting the wrong audience. Rather than tell non-Muslims to ignore the statements issued by Islamist terrorists, CAIR might provide a better public service by loudly and clearly speaking to the terrorists themselves. If the terrorists are wrong theologically, who better than the most visible Muslim advocacy group in the country to set them straight?

Instead, CAIR has chosen the same template over and over again. Like “Fight Club,” the first rule of radical Islam is you do not talk about radical Islam.

CAIR’s Latest Fundraising Letter

3rd-ramadan-thermometerShariah Finance Watch, July 8, 2015:

We thought SFW readers would like to see the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) latest fundraising efforts, since CAIR was identified as an affiliate of HAMAS and the Muslim Brotherhood in terrorism investigations and prosecutions.

CAIR was named an un-indicted co-conspirator in the US v the Holy Land Foundation, the largest successful terrorism financing prosecution in US history.

It is also worth noting that the United Arab Emirates has designated CAIR as a terrorist organization.

Numerous CAIR members and employees have been convicted on terrorism charges.

Despite all this, their fundraising propaganda still portrays them as a civil rights organization…

**********************

As-Salaamu Alaykum

What if CAIR isn’t there. . . 

  • when your child is bullied in school?
  • when you face discrimination in the workplace?
  • when you and your family are profiled at the airport?
  • when a political leader panders to anti-Muslim bigots?
  • when an anti-Islam bill is introduced in your state’s legislature?

We are now in the last 10 days of Ramadan, a period in which blessings for good deeds are multiplied many times.

CAIR needs to raise $530,799 in this period to meet our Ramadan fundraising goal and to be there when you need us. Will you do your part? 

One hadith states: “(The Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him) would strive (to do acts of worship) during the last 10 days of Ramadan more than he would at any other time.”

Why not gain additional blessings for yourself and your family these last days of Ramadan by sending your zakat or sadaqah to CAIRthe nation’s leading Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization?

Contributions to CAIR are both zakat-eligible and tax-deductible.

Consider giving $30, $50, $100, $250, $500, $1,000, $2,500, $5,000, or whatever you can. We appreciate any contribution you give. 

Please take a minute RIGHT NOW to show your support for our work by going to www.cair.com to make a contribution. We also accept donations using PayPal. You may mail your contribution to: CAIR, 453 New Jersey Ave. S.E., Washington, D.C., 20003.

May Allah bless you and your family.

Sincerely,

Nihad Awad

CAIR National Executive Director

P.S. – Please send this appeal to your friends and family, and post on Facebook, Twitter and other social networks. Remember: CAIR is a 100% tax-deductible (Tax ID Number 77-0646756) and zakat-eligible nonprofit organization.

President Obama: “We are not at war with Islam” – but is Radical Islam at War with Us?

ISIS Foreign Fighters Source: ADL

ISIS Foreign Fighters Source: ADL

NER, by Jerry Gordon, Feb. 19, 2015:

On Wednesday, February 18, 2014 at a White House Summit, President Obama presented his views on countering “violent extremism”.  He suggested that Islamic terrorists misappropriate Islamic doctrine, exploit disaffected youths in communities across the US and globally throughout the Ummah- the community of Muslim believers. He suggested that youths prone to radicalization outside the US may be victimized by poverty, without job opportunities and oppressed by corrupt regimes. Countering violent extremism he suggests is a multi-pronged approach involving economic programs, political reform and community involvement to halt radicalization. His focus in the US was on creating community partnerships and pilot projects in several American cities, endeavoring to integrate Muslims in America, preserving and protecting their civil rights under our constitution against untoward surveillance. The President gathered Muslim and other religious clerics from the US and abroad, community leaders, law enforcement, homeland security officials, and high tech entrepreneurs seeking means of stopping radicalization of youths. Youths  attracted by the ‘successes’ of  the Islamic State blasted around the world via the internet,  tens of thousands of tweets, high production videos and on-line webzines in a number of languages including English.

Watch this C-Span video excerpt of the President’s remarks at the White House Summit on Countering Violent Extremism:

Nowhere in his remarks , did  the President explain what the Islamic doctrine is that has attracted tens of thousands of foreign fighters, Americans  among them,  to be recruited to the cause of this self-styled Caliphate, the Islamic State (IS).  What he has called ISIL, the Islam State in the Levant (ISIL) is a reference to the broad geographic area that stretches from the Mediterranean coast of Israel to the shore of the Persian Gulf encompassing the Arabian Peninsula.   Those ‘successes’ include videos of the savagery perpetrated against the hated Kuffars, Infidels, including Christians, Jews, ancient religious minorities and apostate Muslims.  Those videos show barbaric beheadings, burnings, crucifixions, mass shootings and enslavement.   The President mentioned recent incidents in Paris, Copenhagen, Ottawa and Sydney of attacks on victims without naming the victims; leftists, free thinkers, Christians and Jews. Neither did he identify the perpetrators.  He used the unfortunate murder of three Muslims in North Carolina by an alleged atheist insinuating that it may have been a hate crime equivalent to Antisemitism.  Interestingly, 60 percent of FBI hate crimes reported involve Antisemitic acts, such as vandalism spray painted on garage doors in Madison, Wisconsin last weekend.  Less than 12 percent of such FBI reports involve hate crimes against Muslims.   Coincidentally, the ADL, which the White House invited to the Summit, released a report,   Homegrown Islamic Extremism in 2014, identifying American Muslims involved in perpetrating violent hate crimes and others arrested in the process of leaving to join IS.

February 18th coincided with Ash Wednesday in the Christian calendar signifying the onset of the 40 days of Lent.  The ashes of burned palm fronds dobbed on the foreheads of professing Christians as an emblem of penitence reflects the biblical injunction about the fragility of life   as stated in   Genesis: 3:19: “For dust you are and to dust you shall return.”   Notice of recent atrocities committed against Christians by IS was reflected in remarks of Pope Francis in Rome and Cardinal Donald Wuerl, Archbishop of Washington.  Pope Francis remarked   about the by masked IS followers on the shores  of Libya beheading of 21 Coptic Christians communicating a message to all Nations of the Cross that conquest of Rome could follow, “ they are Christians, the  blood of our brothers and sisters cries out.” Following the slaughter of Christians in Libya IS perpetrated in Iraq, a barbaric burning alive of 45 Kurdish captives held in cages.

Just prior to the mid-February White House Summit, The Atlantic Magazine published an article by Graeme Wood, What ISIS Really Wants.  The subtext capsules the arguments propounded   by Wood:

The Islamic State is no mere collection of psychopaths. It is a religious group with carefully considered beliefs, among them that it is a key agent of the coming apocalypse. Here’s what that means for its strategy—and for how to stop it.

Bill Warner of the Center for the Study of Political Islam in an email exchange with this writer after reading the Wood Atlantic article commented, “This is a jump in level. First, [Bill] Mahr and now this. The lib/progressive clue phone is ringing.”  Russian historian at Connecticut Central State University, Professor Jay Bergman, wrote, “I read it.  Superb.  The [President] should read it.  But of course…he won’t.”

According to Wood, IS bases all of its power and authority on a strict adherence to a Salafi literal interpretation of Islam and Sharia law, with almost a total focus on the doctrine of Tawhid.  Tawhid calls for strict adherence to the laws of Allah as revealed by the Prophet Mohammed. Further that  all man-made laws and systems must be rejected.  IS considers, any Muslim who  doesn’t adhere  to the doctrine of  Tawhid , an infidel, including “core Al Qaeda” and other Salafists who object to IS public displays  of savagery.

Wood reveals the Tawhid doctrine of IS citing spokesman Sheikh Abu Muhammad al-Adnani and   Western experts like Professor Bernard Heykal at Princeton.  Wood interviewed proponents of these same Salafist Jihadist views exemplified by “prophetic methodology” of the exemplar Mohammed, Allah’s messenger.  Among  leading Salafists in the west  interviewed  by  Wood  is Sheik Anjem Choudary in the UK, a subject of monitoring by Mi-5 for his radical views.  Wood’s interview with Australian radical Muslim preacher and IS recruiter Musa Cerantonio, reveals the apocalyptic end time vision espoused by Salafists.   Wood explains how doctrine IS is faithful  to foundational  Islam anchored in Sharia and Islamic legal rulings, frequently citing them in conduct of its feats of savage barbarity. He also notes how  the leaders of the Islamic State, considers the leaders of  the Muslim Brotherhood , Al Qaeda and even other Salafists  as takfir, apostates, subject to death  fatwas.

Read more

CAIR Mourns Charlie Hebdo, Yet Advocates Censorship

Cair posterAmerican Thinker, By Andrew E. Harrod, Jan. 25, 2015

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a Hamas-derived “civil rights” group, “repeated its defense of freedom of speech” in a baffling January 7 press release that “condemned” the Paris jihadist Charlie Hebdo massacre. A trip down a bad memory lane, though, is necessary in order to evaluate critically CAIR’s commitment to free speech rights with proverbial grains of salt equivalent to the Dead Sea’s renowned salinity.

CAIR, an unindicted terrorism coconspirator, and “defense of freedom of speech” simply do not match. CAIR, for example, has unsuccessfully tried to stop critical commentary on Islam in an American public library and school. CAIR has also harassed a Michigan individual who opposed a mosque construction with frivolous subpoenas, ultimately quashed. One 2012 article on the CAIR-Chicago affiliate website discussed how the First Amendment has “been manipulated to make America the catalyst for unjust hate.”

Nihad Awad

Nihad Awad

Accordingly, CAIR executive director Nihad Awad sounded an uncertain free speech trumpet when presenting the press release that noted Charlie Hebdo’s “derogatory references to Islam and its Prophet Muhammad.” Awad equated “extremists of all backgrounds who seek to stifle freedom and to create or widen societal divisions,” placing thereby Charlie Hebdo’s victims on a level with their murderers. Similar analysis had appeared in a 2006 CAIR press release concerning the Danish cartoons, even as CAIR, the 2015 press release recalled, “rejected the sometimes violent response to Danish cartoons mocking the Prophet Muhammad.”

“We all value freedom of expression,” Awad had written to the Danish ambassador in 2006. “But we should also use good judgment and common sense to avoid actions” that are “intentionally insulting” or “promote hatred.” Awad proposed CAIR “as a bridge between the Muslim community worldwide and the government of Denmark” in “offering proactive educational measures.” CAIR could therefore exploit the affair to present Islam in a positive manner and effectively proselytize.

At the same time, Parvez Ahmed, CAIR’s then chairman and a Hamas/Hezbollah apologist who had also extended a speaking invitation to a neo-Nazi while leading CAIR’s Florida chapter, expressed support for blasphemy laws. Ahmed wrote on his website that a “connection between terrorism and a venerated religious figure such as Prophet Muhammad transgresses all bounds of decency.” “Free speech, like every other freedom, comes with responsibility,” Ahmed intoned, and the “affair was avoidable had all sides approached the issue wisely.” Ahmed demanded the “same zero tolerance for Islamophobia as… anti-Semitism” while painting dark scenarios of speech inciting violence. He feared “plunging the world into the abyss of a clash between civilizations.”

Ahmed Rehab, CAIR-Chicago’s director and a similar Hamas and Nazi apologist, also discussed “racism targeting Muslims” during a 2008 radio interview on republishing the Danish cartoons. “The majority of Muslims are both against the cartoons and, of course, against death threats,” was Rehab’s immoral equivalence. America does not have “absolute freedom of speech” allowing pornography on daytime television, for example, but a “responsible tradition of free speech.”

The Danish cartoons were a “red flag” for Rehab who, like Ahmed, falsely analogized criticizing Islam to anti-Semitic prejudice. “Long before there was any indication of gas chambers,” European Jews confronted bigoted “freedom of expression.”  The “demonization of a particular faith community or race-based community,” Rehab hyperbolically warned, can incite “further violence against that group or… discrimination.” “Just because one has a right” to speak, Rehab added online in 2010, “does not make it the right thing to do” under a “standard of decency.”

The strategies of CAIR et al. to equate criticism of Islamic ideas with prejudice against individuals and warn of non-Muslim speech inciting Muslim violence have not been without effect. President Barack Obama condemned the Charlie Hebdo assault as an “attack on our free press,” but in 2012 an Obama spokesperson had doubted the magazine’s “judgment” in publishing Muhammad cartoons. Days later Obama infamously declared before the United Nations General Assembly that “future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”

The Organization of Islamic Cooperation’s fifty-seven member states, meanwhile, have advocated for years legal suppression of “Islamophobia” as a “crime against humanity” resembling anti-Semitism. Countries like Denmark have obliged with hate speech prosecutions against Islam’s critics, something not protested by CAIR. Private news organizations also often refrain from showing cartoons offensive to Muslims, while showing no such scruples towards Christians.

Under CAIR’s standards, individuals touching the third religious rail of Islam might escape with their lives, but not their liberty. If social ostracism does not suffice to silence those irreverent towards Islam, groups like CAIR will not refrain from seeking where possible legal instruments of censorship. While trying to talk a good talk on liberty, CAIR’s past shows all too clearly where it is heading.

Islamist Panel Approaches Self-Parody in Hebdo/Radicalization Talk

IPT News
January 23, 2015

1118A panel discussion Thursday hosted by the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy (CSID) promised to plumb the “the root causes of radicalization” in the wake of the Paris terrorist attacks at Charlie Hebdo magazine and a kosher market.

It turns out the problem is not Islamic theology or radical Muslim ideology. It’s all the things the West does wrong. Fix those problems, panelists said, and things get better.

During the 90-minute program at the National Press Club, no speaker discussed the Quranic verses invoked by terrorists in the Islamic State or al-Qaida to justify their actions. Instead, speakers emphasized a host of grievances that they say lead young Muslims to believe that peace and democracy will not lead to the changes they desire.

Muslim immigrants must be treated with more dignity and equality, said CSID founder Radwan Masmoudi. “Basically you must end all forms of racism, discrimination and hatred directed against Europeans of Arab descent or of the Islamic faith.” The West also must end the war in Syria and denounce the ouster of the Muslim Brotherhood regime by Egypt’s military in July 2013.

Dalia Mogahed, a pollster and former White House adviser, took issue with the public reaction to the attacks. Defending the right to offend people as part of free expression plays into the terrorists’ agenda, she said. There is such a right, but society normally polices “incredibly offensive depiction(s)” of minorities. She wasn’t offended by the Charlie Hebdo cartoons as a Muslim, but she was “disgusted” by them as an American.

"All is forgiven"

“All is forgiven”

“The correct question isn’t, ‘can we?'” she said, “the correct question is ‘should we?'”

Mogahed called the attack on Charlie Hebdo “a very strange event” because it came at a time in which there were no protests. “The shooting literally came out of nowhere. It was a calculated act of provocation on the part of terrorist organizations. This was not an organic, or even fanatical, response of just rage and anger against cartoons.” This ignores the magazine’s history of satirizing all faiths, generating no violence from Christians or Jews. Last week, 10 people were killed in Niger when protesters angry at the latest Charlie Hebdo cover torched churches.

The assertion is puzzling because, as a pollster, Mogahed has monitored attitudes in the Muslim world for years. As such, she is well aware that the Paris attacks did not happen in a vacuum. In 2004, Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh was murdered on an Amsterdam street by a radical Muslim angered by van Gogh’s film, Submission, which focused on Islam’s treatment of women. In 2010, Danish cartoonist Kurt Westergaard survived a home invasion attack by an ax-wielding Somali with ties to the Islamist terrorist group Al-Shabaab.

American Colleen LaRose, known as “Jihad Jane,” is serving a 10-year prison sentence in part due to her plotting to travel to Sweden to kill another cartoonist, Lars Vilks. That murder, she wrote in an email obtained by federal investigators, would be “my goal till i achieve it or die trying.”

There are numerous other examples of plots and attacks targeting people for their depictions of Islam’s prophet.

But the intent behind the attacks, Mogahed said, “was for Europe to respond essentially exactly as it did – to assert the right to offend by reprinting the cartoons.”

That certainly is a point of view. Another is that the terrorists hoped to intimidate others from showing images of Muhammad under any circumstance. Given that major American news outlets, including the New York Times, CNN and Fox and others have refused to show the Charlie Hebdo images, the attacks succeeded.

The focus on radical Islam and defense of free speech that resulted from the Paris attacks gave the terrorists “the rhetorical victory they desired,” she said. A better response would have been “to reassert the place of French citizens of Muslim faith in the republic.”

Mogahed and others repeatedly expressed resentment that the terrorists’ beliefs were being conflated with the beliefs held by 1.7 billion Muslims worldwide. They provided no examples to show this is what people mean when they talk about Islamic extremism.

Whatever the merits of Mogahed’s argument, it seems to have little connection to the causes of radicalization, which is what the panel was supposed to discuss.

In a podcast Wednesday, atheist writer Sam Harris slammed an emphasis on the West’s flaws in analyzing the Paris terrorist attacks as “completely insane.” After slaughtering the Charlie Hebdo staffers, Harris notes, Cherif and Said Kouachi yelled, “We have avenged the prophet.” They did not lament racism, disenfranchisement or any other grievance.

“That’s what causes someone to grab an AK 47 and murder 12 cartoonists and then scream ‘Allahu Akhbar’ in the streets,” Harris said facetiously. “It is a completely insane analysis. Even if you grant everything that’s wrong with capitalism and the history of colonialism, you should not be able to deny that these religious maniacs are motivated by concerns about blasphemy and the depiction of the prophet Muhammad, and consider their behavior entirely ethical in light of specific religious doctrines. And it’s a kind of masochism and moral cowardice and lack of intelligence, frankly, at this point, that is allowing people to deny this fact.”

Harris argued that the Charlie Hebdo cartoons were not racist. But even if they were, emphasizing the offensive nature of the images shows someone “has completely lost the plot here.”

“[P]rotecting this speech becomes important when you have one group of people – ‘radical Muslims’ – who are responding to this offense with credible threats of murder in every country on earth. We can’t give in to this.”

“People have been murdered over cartoons,” he added. “End of moral analysis.”

Not for Nihad Awad, co-founder and executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). His prepared remarks at the radicalization forum focused on the frustration he said Muslim American youth feel for constantly having to condemn the actions of others and for drawing disproportionate law enforcement attention.

“Islam has been blamed for the recent events, not the terrorists themselves,” Awad said. The media’s focus on the religious motivation inspiring terrorists and references to a war of ideas within Islam “is very offensive to me, to implicate the entire Islamic faith and the 1.7 billion people into accusing them of being inherently violent and warring among themselves. I believe this is dishonest discourse.”

Awad’s assertion is contradicted by other Muslims who believe the only way to stem radicalization is by modernizing and reforming Islam, steering away from strict, literalist interpretations. In addition, those most offended by cartoons or commentaries need to learn more peaceful ways to express their frustration.

Read more (with video)

U.S. Muslim Brotherhood Political Party Financially Supports Congressman André Carson

2527216764Center for Security Policy, Jan. 5, 2015:

The Muslim American Society (MAS) and Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) just concluded their 13th annual convention held at the McCormick Center in President Barack Obama’s hometown of Chicago from 25-28 December 2014. Notable among the scheduled contributors at this gathering of high level international and national leadership representing the jihadist Muslim Brotherhood was keynote speaker U.S. Congressman André Carson, a Democrat from Indiana’s 7th District. The presence at this convention of an elected U.S. lawmaker who has received financial donations from Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated organizations ever since he was first elected to the House of Representatives in a special election in early 2008 must be a matter of serious concern.

Controversy surrounds the appearance of Congressman Carson at the MAS-ICNA 2014 Convention in Chicago where he was a scheduled panelist together with Mazen Mokhtar, National Executive Director for the Muslim American Society, which was founded as the U.S. branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. Worse yet, according to the testimony of federal agents in federal courts, MAS National Executive Director Mokhtar facilitated operations for running an Al-Qa’eda website responsible for raising funds for the Taliban. In March 2014, MAS was just one of several Muslim Brotherhood-affiliates that joined together to establish the U.S. Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO), the first U.S. political party openly founded by members of the North American Brotherhood network.

At the December 2014 MAS-ICNA Convention, Carson and Mokhtar were scheduled to speak on a panel addressing “Ferguson Is Our Issue: We Can’t Breathe.” The following picture is from the actual program of the MAS-ICNA 2014 Convention issued to attendees, which clearly shows that Congressman Carson was scheduled to appear on a panel 26 December 2014 with Mazen Mokhtar, the executive director of USCMO member MAS National. (The program date is printed erroneously, as the last Saturday in December 2014 was the 27th, not the 26th). Nevertheless, Carson’s later official statement that he didn’t even find out about this panel until sometime on Sunday 28 December seems questionable.

ferguson

Prior to his scheduled appearance on this panel for Saturday evening, Congressman Carson did make an appearance as scheduled as the keynote speaker for the 13th Annual MAS-ICNA Convention Appreciation Dinner—after which he seems to have disappeared, with no comment from the Convention organizers about the empty seat at the Ferguson panel. The following picture is a screenshot from the MAS-ICNA 2014 convention website providing details for his appearance.

meet celebrity

There’s no question the Congressman was present at the Convention Center on the date in question. The following images are from Muslim Brotherhood leader Sabri Samirah’s organization UMMA and UMMA Board of Trustee member Darwish Mabruk’s Facebook pages, showing photos taken during the MAS-ICNA convention where Congressman Carson is pictured meeting with various Muslim Brotherhood leadership figures, apparently just prior to the dinner.

Pic3Carson handshake

Later, as the back-pedaling began, Congressman Carson issued a press statement on 31 December 2014 as shown in the screenshot below from his official Twitter account. In both the press statement and Tweet, however, he strangely neglected to mention the Muslim American Society, which was the co-sponsor of the MAS-ICNA Convention chaired by Hussein Ata(president, Mosque Foundation in Bridgeview, Illinois, where USCMO Secretary General Oussama Jammal is a past president and current Chairman of MAS-PACE).

Pic5

In Carson’s statement that appears on his Congressional website, the following message was delivered to his constituency on 31 December 2014:

  • INDIANAPOLIS – Today, Congressman André Carson released the following statement in response to his attendance at the ICNA (Islamic Circle of North America) Chicago convention last weekend.
  • On Saturday, December 27, I attended the ICNA Chicago convention to deliver a speech on the importance of civil engagement and developing leaders in the community.
  • On Sunday, December 28, I learned that ICNA had also scheduled me to sit on a Ferguson panel Saturday night – which I had not planned on participating in.  At no point had I ever confirmed to attend any other events other than the dinner.  Any reference to my participation or appearance on the Ferguson panel during the ICNA conference is not factual.
  • As a former law enforcement officer with the Indiana Department of Homeland Security in the anti-terrorism unit, it is critical that Americans know that I would never associate with any individual or organization trying to harm the United States of America or its citizens.

The absence of the Muslim American Society’s name in Congressman Carson’s press statement and Tweet is peculiar. It’s not as though he’d avoided associating with MAS in the past—but of course, that was before the United Arab Emirates (UAE) listed MAS as a terrorist organization, as Patrick Poole noted here. But it’s also not the first time Carson has attempted to conceal details of such problematic associations. In June 2014, Congressman Carson was featured as a keynote speaker for the USCMO’s inaugural banquet, an event shrouded in secrecy with no transcripts, audio, or video having been released, as would usually be customary. Both Congressman Carson and Congressman Keith Ellison (Democrat, MN-5th District) were invited by USCMO Secretary General Oussama Jammal to speak at the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood political party’s event on 10 June 2014 at the Hilton Crystal City Hotel near Washington, D.C. To date, their respective congressional offices have refused to make publicly available either the text or video of the remarks delivered by Carson and Ellison at this high level Muslim Brotherhood function, held at a time when the Obama administration’s foreign policy supporting Brotherhood revolutions in Egypt, Libya, and Syria was collapsing in failure.

So, perhaps the Congressmen’s reticence might have something to do with the all-star Muslim Brotherhood line-up that attended that banquet, a couple of which groups, as noted above, were named in November 2014 by the UAE to its new terrorist organizations list (on that list are both CAIR and MAS, along with the Muslim Brotherhood itself.). As reported by the Muslim Link Paper for this historic Muslim Brotherhood leadership gathering, others in the speaker line-up included Dr. Ousama Jammal, Secretary General, USCMO; Dr. Osama Abu-Irshaid, Board Member, American Muslims for Palestine; Nihad Awad, National Executive Director, Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR); Naeem Baig, President, Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA); Mazen Mokhtar, Executive Director, Muslim American Society (MAS); Khalil Meek, Executive Director, Muslim Legal Fund of America; Imam Delawar Hussein, Dr Lynne Muhammad, Founder, Making A Difference Through Discoveries, American Islamic College, Whitney Young Magnet High School; and W.D. Mohammed II, President, Mosque Cares.

Read more at CSP

Also see:

Days Before UAE Terror Designation, CAIR Awards PIJ Board Member

IPT News
November 20, 2014

1097Officials at the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) have expressed astonishment and confusion over a decision by the United Arab Emirates to include the American-Islamist organization on a list of terrorist groups.

“Well this is shocking to us in the first place,” CAIR co-founder and Executive Director Nihad Awad told CNN Tuesday. “It’s a bizarre move by the UAE and that’s why we’re seeking clarification by this decision, not only CAIR but other civil Muslim organizations including Muslim American Society and the largest Islamic relief organization for Muslims in the West. So it is quite frightening and shocking that a state like the UAE would designate an American civil rights and advocacy organization like CAIR.”

The terrorist list was first reported by Buzzfeed on Saturday, which cited a UAE state media announcement.

One week earlier, a CAIR banquet in California bestowed its “Promoting Justice” award to Sami Al-Arian and his family. Al-Arian was on the Palestinian Islamic Jihad’s Shura Council – its board of directors – in the 1990s and provided refuge to at least three other board members in the United States, including current PIJ Secretary General Ramadan Shallah.

During a 1991 speech in Cleveland, Al-Arian was introduced as the head of a charity called the Islamic Committee for Palestine. “A brief note about the Islamic Committee for Palestine,” Imam Fawaz Damra explained to the audience. “It is the active arm of the Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine. We preferred to call it the “Islamic Committee for Palestine” for security reasons.” [Emphasis added]

[see video]

During a later fundraising session, Damra urged the audience to give to the Islamic Jihad, invoking a recent attack by one of its members. “And whoever wants to write a check,” Damra said, “he can write it in the name if the Islamic Committee for Palestine, ‘ICP’ for short.”

Four years later, in the wake of a double-suicide bombing in Israel that killed 21 Israelis, Al-Arian wrote a letter to a Kuwaiti legislator seeking money “for the jihad effort in Palestine so that operations such as these can continue…”

Al-Arian has claimed that the letter was never sent. But it was handwritten in Arabic and signed, and a copy was kept in his home, where federal agents found it during a November 1995 search.

“The evidence was clear in this case that you were a leader of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad,” U.S. District Court Judge James Moody told Al-Arian during a 2006 sentencing hearing. “You were on the board of directors and an officer, the secretary. Directors control the actions of an organization, even the PIJ; and you were an active leader.”

Al-Arian pleaded guilty to conspiring to provide goods or services to the PIJ. His plea agreement included an admission that he was associated with the PIJ. But he has never acknowledged the depth of his involvement, and certainly never disavowed the group’s bylaws, which were found in his home and call for: “The rejection of any peaceful solution for the Palestinian Cause, and the affirmation of the jihad solution and the martyrdom style as the only option for liberation.”

The bylaws include a goal of creating “a state of terror, instability and panic in the souls of Zionists and especially the groups of settlers, and force them to leave their houses.”

CAIR officials know all of this. They have stood by Al-Arian’s side for nearly two decades possessing that knowledge. They also know his plea agreement includes his agreement to be deported.

In introducing the award Nov. 8, CAIR San Francisco Vice President Maleeha Haq explained that “the Al-Arian family was a natural choice. For over 11 years now they have been at the center of an unjust campaign by the government. Alhamdulillah, the government decided to finally dismiss all of their unfounded charges against Dr. Sami Al-Arian. However, he remains in limbo awaiting deportation proceedings.”

Al-Arian thanked CAIR for the award and challenged the audience to fight against law enforcement sting operations, which he said unfairly target and entrap Muslims.

But the only way to stop it… is through a public organization campaign to change the government,” Al-Arian said in a video message. “Brothers and sisters, our young men should not be sacrificed at the altar of Islamophobia or a fake war on terror. Our people should not be targeted because of their beliefs or associations. We should say no to thought crimes, no to preempted or pre-crime prosecutions … This is a crisis that our community has been ignoring for so long, and we must face up to this challenge. Brothers and sisters, ladies and gentlemen – if not you, then who? If not now, when?”

Awad, the CAIR national executive director, also spoke during the banquet at the Santa Clara Convention Center. Despite consistent FBI data showing hate crimes against Muslims remain relatively steady, and far less of a problem those targeting Jews, blacks and gays, Awad had a dire warning for his audience.

“Islamophobia is a national crisis for the Muslim community,” he said. “Islamophobia is an existential threat to the presence and the future of Islam and the future, and the freedom of religion for Muslims in this country.”

The terrorist designation by the UAE, a Muslim nation, wouldn’t be announced for another week. The designation reportedly stems from CAIR’s connections with the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood. In his CNN appearance Tuesday, Awad dismissed that as a fantasy.

“We were never linked to the Muslim Brotherhood,” he insisted. “We are not. We are an independent American organization. But guilt by association should not just be taken easily by these governments.”

Internal Muslim Brotherhood documents tell a different story. They place Awad individually and CAIR as an organization inside a Brotherhood-created Hamas support network in the United States that was called the Palestine Committee.

Awad participated in a secret 1993 Palestine Committee strategy session in Philadelphia called to devise ways to “derail” the new U.S.-brokered Oslo peace initiative without exposing themselves as Hamas supporters. Awad even referred to Hamas in the code name organizers instructed, reversing the spelling and calling it “Samah.”

Those connections were enough to prompt the FBI to cut off all outreach communication with CAIR in 2008. A federal judge determined there was “ample evidence to establish” a connection between CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestinian offshoot Hamas.

At the banquet, Awad acknowledged the contributions to CAIR by co-founder and former national chairman Omar Ahmad, described by an FBI agent as “a leader within the Palestine Committee.”

The UAE’s terror designation doesn’t mean CAIR is actively plotting attacks. But as we have repeatedly demonstrated, it has no problem standing by those who enable terrorism through fundraising, propaganda and more. People like Al-Arian, or the Holy Land Foundation leadership, or convicted Palestinian bomber Rasmieh Odeh.

CAIR’s timing, awarding a PIJ director just before the UAE labeled CAIR as terrorists, doesn’t do much to bolster CAIR’s complaints that it is being unjustly tarnished.

CAIR, 20 Years of Terror

cair-450x187Frontpage, by Joe Kaufman:

On the night of Saturday, November 8, the San Francisco Bay Area chapter of CAIR held its 20th Anniversary Banquet at the Santa Clara Convention Center. It was fitting that two out of three of the event’s featured speakers have been associated with terrorism, as 20 years ago CAIR was founded as a main component of a Palestinian terrorist enterprise inside the United States.

CAIR or the Council on American-Islamic Relations has been in existence for 20 years — since June 1994 — when it opened up its national headquarters in Washington, D.C. The group was established as being a part of the American Palestine Committee, an umbrella organization run by then-global Hamas leader Mousa Abu Marzook, who was based in the U.S. at the time and who now operates out of Egypt as a spokesman for Hamas.

The other members of the umbrella included a Hamas financing wing, Holy Land Foundation (HLF); a Hamas propaganda wing, Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP); and a Hamas command center, United Association for Studies and Research (UASR), which was then led by Ahmed Yousef, who later left the U.S. for Gaza to become Senior Political Adviser to Hamas leader Ismail Haniya.

The founding and current National Executive Director of CAIR is Nihad Awad. Just prior to co-founding CAIR, Awad held the position of Public Relations Director for the IAP. As the propaganda wing of Hamas, the IAP had been involved in distributing Hamas terrorist videos and publishing vehemently anti-Jewish and anti-Israel materials, including the Hamas charter in different languages.

Only months before the creation of CAIR, Awad announced his support for Hamas.

Under Awad’s leadership, CAIR has had a number of representatives cited for terrorist-related activity. CAIR officials have been convicted and imprisoned for terror-related crimes and/or deported from the United States. As well, during Awad’s tenure, CAIR has been cited itself. In 2007 and 2008, amidst two federal trials, the U.S. government named the group a co-conspirator in the raising of millions of dollars for Hamas. The individuals who had been indicted for the trials (CAIR was named an “unindicted co-conspirator”) were found guilty of all charges.

This past Saturday night, Awad was not at his home base in D.C. Instead, he was speaking at a banquet for CAIR’s San Francisco Bay Area (SFBA) chapter. San Francisco was the home of CAIR’s first regional U.S. chapter, established not long after CAIR National was established, hence the California group celebrating its 20th Anniversary.

A second featured speaker at the Saturday banquet was Siraj Wahhaj, the imam of the At-Taqwa Mosque, located in the Bed-Stuy section of Brooklyn, New York. Wahhaj frequently speaks at CAIR sponsored events. Indeed, Wahhaj previously sat on CAIR’s National Board of Advisors.

Wahhaj has been associated with terrorism far beyond his involvement with CAIR.

In 1995, much like CAIR’s trials, Wahhaj was named an “unindicted co-conspirator” for the federal trial prosecuting those involved in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Wahhaj had been linked to the bombmaker of the attack, Clement Rodney Hampton-El, and during the trial he was a character witness for the spiritual leader of the attack — the “Blind Sheikh” Omar Abdel Rahman — whom Wahhaj has openly praised.

Wahhaj has recently taken up the cause of speaking at functions for and doing fundraising for rabid anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan.

Also speaking at the banquet was Nihad Awad’s San Francisco counterpart, Executive Director of CAIR-SFBA Zahra Billoo. Billoo has made a number of extremist statements in the past. She has written that “one amazing reason to get married” is to “raise fighters” (children) to attack the nation of Israel. She wrote that to celebrate Columbus Day is “the same as having Jews celebrate Hitler and the Holocaust.” She refers to U.S. troops as “scum.”

Billoo proudly announced on her blog that her younger brother, Ahmed, was quoted in an article in the Los Angeles Jewish Journal — an article that discusses in length about how her brother supports suicide bombings. Billoo wrote that she, herself, had thoughts of committing suicide, after she viewed a pro-Israel advertisement on a San Francisco train.

On her Twitter account, Billoo boasted that her CAIR event was sold out, and the pictures taken at it do show a full house. This is a frightening indication that many Muslims in America appear to support and approve of CAIR’s agenda. Certainly given the amount of information available about the speakers at the event, one would be hard pressed to believe that the attendees weren’t at least somewhat aware of CAIR’s terror-related background.

While CAIR has attempted to present itself as a Muslim civil rights organization, the individuals involved with CAIR reveal that the group is cynically exploiting this designation.

The title of CAIR’s weekend event was ‘Rooted in Faith,’ but one has to question what type of faith would have radical luminaries who are associated with terrorism representing it.

Beila Rabinowitz, Director of Militant Islam Monitor, contributed to this report.

Mechric Asks Church to Remove Jihadist-Linked Nihad Awad of CAIR

20140413_CAIRNIHADAWAD_LFamily Security Matters:

MECHRIC, the largest coalition of Middle East Christian NGOs in the United States and internationally asked the Archbishop to remove Nihad Awad, the director of Islamist group CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations) from a coalition said to be aimed at helping Christian minorities in the Middle East. MECHRIC said “Middle East Christian minorities are offended by having Nihad Awad and his Islamist group CAIR claim they are part of a coalition in defense of Christian minorities.” MECHRIC argued that Awad and his group are linked to the Muslim Brotherhood, a terror organization in Egypt and other Arab countries, linked to Hamas, and part of a bigoted campaign against Middle East Christians in the US and worldwide.  

Following is the text of the letter, with copies sent to many members of Congress:

Nov 4th 2014

Archbishop Atallah Hanna
Archbishop of Sebastia,
Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem
P.O. Box 14518, Jerusalem 91145
Re: interfaith Coalition to Protect Christians

Dear Bishop Hanna:

We have learned that you have sponsored the formation of an “interfaith coalition to protect Christians and other religious minorities in the Middle East.” We are troubled by the fact that among the NGOs and activists invited to join the coalition are a number of Islamist and pro-Jihadi groups whose agenda has been and continues to be hostile to the freedom and survival of Christian and other minorities in the Middle East.

Among the activists you have included is Nihad Awad, the President of the Council on Islamic American Relations (CAIR), which is an un-indicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation Terrorism case and is not the civil rights organization it claims to be. For more than a decade, CAIR members and former members have been indicted, and some are serving jail sentences, for terrorism cases successfully brought against them. The Islamist organization is considered by experts as a front to the Muslim Brotherhood, which has inspired leading members of al Qaeda and ISIS (Daesh) and has been put on terror lists by Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Bahrain. Several members of Congress, including the Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee in the U.S. House of Representatives, Rep. Pete King, and the Chairwoman of the subcommittee on Intelligence, Rep. Sue Myrick, have considered CAIR an extremist Islamist organization. There are bills introduced in the US House of Representatives calling for identifying the Muslim Brotherhood as a Terror organization.

CAIR has attacked Middle East Christian leaders across America, including Copts such as Dr. Shawki Karas, Lebanese Christians, as well as Iraqi and Syrian Christians while also waging smear campaigns against prominent Middle East experts for raising the issue of persecution of minorities in the Middle East. CAIR stood with the oppressive regimes against Christians and other sectors of civil societies and backed the genocidal regime of Sudan headed by the ICC indicted General Omar Bashir. CAIR backs the Muslim Brotherhood, who in Egypt has been responsible for attacks against Christian Copts and in Libya backed the Jihadi forces responsible for violence against civilians. But even more dangerous, CAIR politically backs the Islamists and the Jihadists who in Syria and in Iraq have persecuted Christians. Some of these factions joined the Islamic State known as ISIS, which has perpetrated war crimes and crimes against Humanity in Mosul, the Nineveh Plain, and Sinjar against Christians and Yazidis.

CAIR and its executive director Nihad Awad have been notorious for suppressing educational programs, both in the public and private sectors, aimed at informing the American public about the persecution of Christian minorities in the Greater Middle East. Awad and his acolytes have politically harassed writers and intellectuals, academics who have been raising the issue of persecution of religious minorities and have become the main obstructers of truth about this persecution. In a sense, Awad and CAIR, by being supportive of the Jihadists and the Islamists and by suppressing the voices defending the persecuted Christians, actually bear some moral responsibility for the persecution and violence against Christians in the Middle East.

It would be unthinkable and unbearable for Middle East Christians and Yazidis to see a so-called interfaith Coalition presided by a Church official, partnering with haters of Middle East Christians and bigots against oppressed Middle East minorities

We therefore, as representatives of the Middle East Christian Committee MECHRIC, representing the largest coalition of Americans from Middle East Christian descent, including Copts, Assyrians, Chaldeans, Syriacs, Maronites, Melkites and other groups, as well as Yazidis, ask you to remove Nihad Awad and any Islamist militant from your coalition immediately. Our communities have been offended by the presence of pro-Jihadists in a coalition claiming to help Middle East Christians and other minorities.

Sincerely,

John Hajjar, on behalf of the Middle East Christian Committee MECHRIC

Executive Committee

 

CC: Members of Congress (Foreign Relations and Homeland Security Committees in House and Senate)

U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations

Senator Robert Menendez, Chairman,

Senator Bob Corker, Ranking-

Senator Ted Cruz

Senator John McCain

Senator Lindsey Graham

House committee on Foreign Affairs

Rep. Edward R. Royce, Chairman

Rep. Eliot L. Engel, Ranking Member

Sub-committees the Middle East and North Africa

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Chairman

Rep. Theodore E. Deutch , Ranking Member

Sub-Committee on Terrorism

Rep. Ted Poe , Chairman

Rep. Brad Sherman, Ranking Member

Committee on Home land security

Rep. Michael McCaul, Chairman

Sub-committee on counter terrorism and Intelligence

Rep. Peter T. King, Chairman-

Rep. Chris Smith

Rep. Louie Gohmert

Islamist Campaign Donors Overwhelmingly Back Democrats

campaign_financeBy David J. Rusin:

An analysis of federal campaign contributions finds that key figures at six of America’s most prominent Islamist organizations have favored Democrats over Republicans by a ratio of 12 to 1 since the 9/11 terrorist attacks. This trend began with multiple donations to Cynthia McKinney dated September 11, 2001, reversing a previous pattern that had seen Islamist officials spend slightly more on Republicans. Their preference for Democrats has solidified during the past 13 years and shows no signs of waning. What does this say about the politicians who benefit from Islamist largesse?

Islamist Watch [1], a project of the Middle East Forum [2], recently launched Islamist Money in Politics [3] (IMIP [3]), to monitor Islamists’ influence in the halls of power, inform the public about which politicians accept their tainted money, and hold accountable those who do. IMIP’s inaugural data release [4] focuses on the national organizations of six Islamist entities [5] — the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR [6]), Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA [7]), Islamic Society of North America (ISNA [8]), Muslim Alliance in North America (MANA [9]), Muslim American Society (MAS [10]), and Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC [11]) — as well as CAIR’s many local chapters.

Names of important personnel [12], both current and former, were mined from the groups’ Internal Revenue Service filings and/or website listings, some going back more than a decade. The Federal Election Commission’s online database [13], which spans the late 1990s to the present, was then searched for donations to candidates, joint fundraising committees, relevant political action committees, and parties. IMIP employed biographical information to select only those contributions that could reasonably be attributed to the individuals of interest, rejecting ones likely to have been made by unrelated persons who share their names. See IMIP’s description of methodology [14] for details and a discussion of the challenges.

As of now, the IMIP database [3] tabulates nearly $700,000 in donations. Surely many more people and contributions remain to be added, but the data already constitute a large and representative sample that is sufficient for an initial pass at quantifying Islamists’ political affinities.

First, who contributes? Major donors tend to be board members rather than staffers. While many of the biggest contributors maintain relatively low public profiles, several are quite familiar. With outlays totaling $56,800, the most generous funder of politicians in IMIP’s database is Kenny Gamble [15], who goes by Luqman Abdul Haqq [16] in his position on MANA’s governing body. An Islamist-aligned music and real estate mogul [17], Gamble is tied to the “Islamic paramilitary boys group” known as the Jawala Scouts[18] and has been accused of working to build a self-contained “black Muslim enclave [19]” in South Philadelphia. Also among the top 20 donors are CAIR executive director Nihad Awad [20], who has contributed under numerous variants of his name; former MAS president and current CAIR national board member Esam Omeish [21], who resigned from a Virginia immigration panel [22] in 2007 after a video emerged of his speech touting the Palestinians’ embrace of “the jihad way” against Israel; and Zead Ramadan [23], the CAIR-New York board member who unsuccessfully ran for New York City Council [24] in 2013.

With regard to recipients, the Democratic Party [25] dominates. Leading the all-time list by vacuuming up close to one in every five dollars is Keith Ellison [26], the Islamist-leaning Muslim congressman [27] from Minnesota who has a long history of collaborating with Islamist groups. Barack Obama [28], whose policies have been popular with Islamists [29], comes in second when direct contributions are combined with those sent to joint fundraising committees associated with his 2008 [30] and 2012 [31] presidential campaigns. Third is Cynthia McKinney [32], the far-left former congresswoman [33] from Georgia who peddled conspiracy theories and harsh critiques of U.S. foreign policy in the wake of 9/11; that she ranks so high despite the fact that most donations to her were collected during a one-year, post-9/11 window testifies to Islamists’ endorsement of her adversarial stance at the outset of America’s military response to Islamic terrorism. Fourth is Indiana’s André Carson [34], the second Muslim congressman [35] to be elected; he told attendees [36] at the 2012 ICNA–MAS convention that educators should model American schools after Islamic madrassas. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee [37] rounds out the top five.

However, Democrats did not always prevail in the battle for Islamist cash. According to IMIP’s current data, Republicans [38] actually received about 15 percent more Islamist-related contributions than Democrats [25] did over the several years prior to 9/11. The Islamists’ favorite Republican of that period was Californian Tom Campbell [39], who contested a Senate seat in 2000. Campbell’s warm [40] relationships [41] with radical Muslims, such as terror operative Sami al-Arian [42], are thoroughly documented. Further, although IMIP features only a handful of entries from the 2000 presidential race, there is more money for George W. Bush [43] than for Al Gore [44]. This is not a surprise because Bush won the backing [45] of the American Muslim Political Coordination Committee, an Islamist-heavy coalition.

Read more at PJ Media

Brookings Takes Both Sides of the Issue on Islamist Censorship

Part 3 of a 4-Part Investigative Series: Brookings Sells Soul to Qatar’s Terror Agenda

by Steven Emerson, John Rossomando and Dave Yonkman
IPT News
October 30, 2014

1081Brookings’ partnership with the Organization for Islamic Cooperation (OIC), in conjunction with its Qatari-backed Project on U.S. Relations with the Islamic World, sends a mixed message for a think tank that claims to want “a more open, safe, prosperous and cooperative international system.”

The OIC is a 57-government body (56 nations plus the Palestinian Authority) that constitutes the largest United Nations voting bloc.

Fighting against criticism of Islam and those who link the religion with violence under the banner of so-called “Islamophobia” features prominently in the OIC’s rhetoric and diplomacy.

“Freedom of expression … cannot be used as a pretext for inciting hatred … or insulting the deeply held beliefs of any community. It should respect the beliefs and tenets of all religions,” OIC’s “Seventh Observatory Report on Islamophobia: October 2013-April 2014” states.

Islamophobia under OIC’s definition even covers court-proven facts such as the use of zakat (charity) payments to fund terror, evidenced by the international body’s attack on FBI training materials that describes it as a “funding mechanism for combat.”

Zakat is the tithe Muslims must pay as a pillar of their faith. It may be spent on feeding the hungry or caring for the sick, but also for funding violent jihad. Muslim authors suchas Sheik Muhammad Ali Hashimi, a well-known author in the Arab world, teach that funding “jihad for the sake of Allah” is the most important use for zakat.

Court documents and classified State Department cables demonstrate that numerous charities such as Qatar Charity (formerly the Qatar Charitable Society), the Holy Land Foundation (HLF) and countless others have diverted zakat collections to benefit terror groups such as al-Qaida and Hamas. A 2012 UN Security Council report notes that the Taliban uses zakat collected from areas it controls to finance its operations.

Instead of unequivocally and unconditionally defending free speech, Brookings sends mixed messages, with some experts endorsing the OIC’s effort on Islamophobia and others condemning its excesses.

Brookings scholar Ahmet T. Kuru argued following the Sept. 11, 2012 terror attack in Benghazi, Libya that left Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans dead, that Muslims need “mechanisms and institutions” to prevent the dissemination of “anti-Islamic propaganda.” In this case, Kuru implicitly referred to the “Innocence of Muslims” video that the Obama administration and others blamed for triggering the attack.

“The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) has taken some important steps forward in promoting respectful, civilized and effective ways of fighting Islamophobia. Their diplomatic attitudes, however, have yet to spread at the grassroots level,” Kuru wrote, contrasting the OIC’s efforts with those of violent Muslim protesters. “The recent incident also shows how counterproductive Islamophobia is. There are politicians and religious leaders in the United States and Europe who, unfortunately, promote Islamophobia.

“Western countries need to develop effective mechanisms and institutions to marginalize Islamophobes; that will be consistent with their principle of working against discrimination, as well as serving their interests in different parts of the world.”

Other Brookings scholars reflect this line of reasoning about the threat from Islamophobia and their perspectives similarly align with many of the OIC’s complaints.

A few years earlier, in a June 2007 article, former Brookings scholar Peter Singer cited former U.S. diplomat William Fisher, saying that “an unreasoning and uninformed Islamophobia” served as a new prejudice that threatened to undermine U.S. foreign policy and that it was rapidly becoming “implanted in our national genetics.”

Brookings scholar David Benjamin extended this line of reasoning in an Oct. 7, 2008 paper, stating that Islamophobia driven by “the religious right and talk radio” had undermined the integration of Muslims into American society. He claimed this compounded the effects with “dubious prosecutions.”

“Officials should denounce incidents of anti-Muslim sentiment quickly and vigorously,” Benjamin wrote.

The OIC’s diplomatic efforts against so-called Islamophobia have included applying pressure to governments and international bodies to criminalize free speech.

OIC’s war on free speech

Brookings invited then-OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu to speak at its annual U.S.-Islamic World Forum in 2006, 2011, 2012 and 2013 in Doha. The conferences drew intellectuals and policymakers from the United States and across the Muslim world, and serve as a major part of Brookings’ Project on U.S. Relations with the Islamic World.

Ihsanoglu’s organization for years has lobbied the European Union and the United Nations to outlaw criticism of Islam.

Read more