THE UNITED WEST: FBI WARNING: CAIR Organized by HAMAS

 

Published on Oct 19, 2014 by theunitedwest

In 2008 the Federal Bureau of Investigation warned America that the self-proclaimed “Muslim civil-rights” group, CAIR, was really part of the Palestinian terrorist organization the HAMAS.

In fact, as we have proven, CAIR, the Council on American Islamic Relations actually functions as the “Special Operations Division” (SOD) of the political department of the HAMAS. Part of the CAIR “SOD” functions is to attack with media propaganda any person or organization who analyzes or criticizes CAIR.

For several years now, CAIR has been able to maintain their non-terrorist Islamic “hue,” that is, until they have become a subject of our ground-breaking series, “Enemies of the State.” Stay tuned to this unique series as we send our research investigators deeply into the federal files on CAIR and present factual conclusions that will disrupt, disable and destroy the operations of CAIR/HAMAS USA.

Analysis: Does the Islamic State Really Have ‘Nothing to Do with Islam’?

by Jeffrey M. Bale
Special to IPT News
October 10, 2014

1071


Note: This analysis has been excerpted, with the approval of the author, from a much longer scholarly article that will be published in an academic journal.

“Which will come first, flying cars and vacations to Mars, or a simple acknowledgement that beliefs guide behavior and that certain religious ideas – jihad, martyrdom, blasphemy, apostasy – reliably lead to oppression and murder?”

Sam Harris, Sleepwalking Toward Armageddon

As is invariably the case these days in the wake of the terrorist violence, brutality, and atrocities carried out explicitly in the name of Islam, a host of dissimulating Islamist activists, other Muslims in a state of psychological denial, and apologetic Western pundits insist that the actions of the terrorist group calling itself al-Dawla al-Islamiyya (IS: the Islamic State) have little or nothing to do with Islam.

Not long ago, many such commentators also argued that the horrendous actions committed by the Nigerian jihadist group Jama’at Ahl al-Sunna li al-Da’wa wa al-Jihad, better known as Boko Haram (Western Influence is Sinful), had nothing to do with its members’ interpretations of Islam.

In all such cases, however, the perpetrators of these violent actions not only proudly insist that their actions are inspired by the Qur’an and the exemplary words and deeds of Muhammad himself (as recorded in the canonical hadith collections), but explicitly cite relevant Qur’anic passages and the reported actions of their prophet to justify those actions. Therefore, to argue that jihadist terrorists are not directly inspired and primarily motivated by their interpretations of Islamic doctrines and by clear precedents from early Islamic history, one must stubbornly ignore what the actual protagonists keep telling the entire world.

But why ignore the claims of the perpetrators and instead rely on Islamist activists, who are often peddling outright disinformation, or on Western commentators, most of whom know little or nothing about Islam or Islamism, for explanations of this behavior? These pundits are prone to minimize the central role played by Islamist ideology and erroneously ascribe the actions of jihadist terrorists to assorted subsidiary causal factors, such as garden-variety political grievances, poverty, lack of democracy, psychopathology, greed, or simple hunger for power.

Needless to say, most of the commentators who keep insisting, against all evidence to the contrary, that the actions of jihadist terrorists cannot be attributed to their interpretations of Islam do not also argue that the violent actions of other types of extremists cannot be attributed to their ideological beliefs. On the contrary, whenever other types of terrorists carry out gruesome attacks, many of those same commentators are quick to ascribe their actions primarily to their proclaimed theological and ideological beliefs – and justifiably so.

One can easily illustrate this glaring contrast with respect to the analytical treatment of Islamist terrorism by asking a simple question: when was the last time that any more or less respected commentator made the case that Nazi ideology had nothing to do with inspiring particular acts of terrorism committed by self-identified neo-Nazis, or that notions of white supremacy had nothing to do with anti-minority violence committed by members of the Ku Klux Klan? Thus it is virtually only in cases of acts of terrorism committed by jihadists that one encounters so much unwillingness to face reality and so much frantic desperation to absolve Islam itself – or even Islamist interpretations of Islam – from shouldering any responsibility for inspiring acts committed in its name.

Some academicians mistakenly minimize the role of ideology as a key factor in inspiring the violence and terrorism carried out by non-state extremist groups, not just in the case of jihadist terrorism but also in other such cases. These efforts are seriously misleading, since they tend to be based on flawed social science theories that overemphasize the role of “rational choice,” materialistic rather than idealistic motives, personal psychological factors, “really existing” political and economic grievances, or larger impersonal structural forces as causal factors in the etiology of terrorism. However, they at least have the merit of not employing double standards, i.e., of making an unwarranted and wholly artificial distinction between the causes of Islamist terrorism and other types of ideologically-inspired terrorism. Indeed, although some have specifically applied such problematic notions in the context of Islamist terrorism, there is no reason to suppose that they regard ideology as being any more important in other terrorism contexts.

But the most egregious nonsense about the Islamic State is currently being peddled by ideologues, spokesmen, and activists from Islamist organizations, both in the Muslim world and in the West. Leading Saudi clerics, Saudi-sponsored and Saudi-funded international Islamic organizations like the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), and numerous Islamist groups and networks linked to the Muslim Brotherhood are now belatedly hastening to denounce the IS and to falsely claim that it has “nothing to do with Islam” or that its appalling actions are “un-Islamic” or even “anti-Islamic.”

Unfortunately, many naïve or agenda-driven Western journalists cite these deceptive statements by Islamists in an effort to challenge conservative Western media claims that not enough Muslims are speaking out against the IS. Indeed, those journalists tend to highlight such statements to give the impression that lots of supposedly moderate Muslims are publicly opposing the IS, either without actually knowing or without bothering to mention that most of the people and organizations that are making such statements are in fact Islamists who are trying to whitewash Islam and their own brands of Islamism, burnish their own tarnished images and thereby protect themselves, and/or mislead gullible “infidels” in the media.

Most of these commentators repeat the same one-sided mantras that have been endlessly repeated since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, e.g., that “Islam is a religion of peace” or that “Islam does not sanction terrorism and beheadings,” usually without providing any actual textual or historical evidence in support of their claims. This is all the more peculiar, since if the jihadists affiliated with the IS were in fact egregiously misinterpreting Islam, it should be very easy indeed for their critics to point this out by referring to Islam’s sacred scriptures and the reported words and deeds of Muhammad to explicitly repudiate barbarous IS actions such as the wholesale massacre or torture of captives, the confiscation of their land and wealth, the enslavement (sexual and otherwise) of their women, the gruesome public beheadings and stonings of designated enemies and “sinners” in order to terrorize others and perhaps also to precipitate the arrival of the Mahdi and the onset of the “end times,” the wanton destruction of places of worship and historical monuments, and the list goes on and on.

Yet they generally fail to do this. On those rare occasions when they try to demonstrate that these kinds of activities are “un-Islamic,” usually by citing a handful of Qur’anic passages out of context or by noting a few recorded examples of Muhammad’s compassion, their arguments are weak and unconvincing, if not preposterous. The jihadists themselves and certain hardline pro-jihadist clerics have thus far seemingly had little trouble rebutting their Muslim critics’ often specious arguments.

An illustrative example of such Islamist sophistry is provided by Nihad ‘Awad, national executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a key component of the Muslim Brotherhood network in the U.S.

In an opinion piece entitled “ISIS is Not Just Un-Islamic, It is Anti-Islamic,” ‘Awad describes ISIS as a “criminal gang” that “falsely…claims to uphold the banner of Islam.” In support of his claim, ‘Awad attempts to redefine the term jihad in such a way that it cannot be associated with offensive warfare.

Much more at IPT

Dr. Jeffrey M. Bale is an Associate Professor in the Nonproliferation and Terrorism Studies Program at the Monterey Institute of International Studies (MIIS), where his focus is on the study of political and religious extremism and terrorism. He obtained his B.A. in Middle Eastern and Islamic history at the University of Michigan, and his Ph.D. in modern European history at the University of California at Berkeley.

Is CAIR Lying about a Rally for Hamas?

by Daniel Pipes
Gatestone Institute
August 22, 2014

A “Stop the Bloodshed in Gaza” rally in downtown Miami on July 20 featured aggressive Islamist chants typical of anti-Israel events. In English, the demonstrators yelled “We are Hamas!” and “We are Jihad!” (as can be seen and heard here). In Hebrew, a Hamas partisan screamed at an Israel-supporter, “Son of a bitch” and “Go to Hell!” and made an obscene arm gesture. In Arabic, the crowd chanted the infamous “Khaybar, Khaybar, oh Jew, Muhammad’s army will return” (a reference to a massacre of Jews under the auspices of Islam’s prophet in A.D. 629).

As I say, just a typical anti-Israel demonstration, and far from the worst. Typical – except that some of its sponsors desperately seek respectability.

In a July 23 report on the demonstration, investigative researcher Danielle Avel posted a scan of a glossy paper flier advertising the event, listing its seven sponsors:

American Muslim Association of North America (AMANA), Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) Florida, Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), Syrian American Council of South Florida (SAC), American Muslims for Emergency & Relief (AMER), and American Muslims Foundation.




The event’s Facebook page lists a coalition of eight organizations, some of which overlap with those on the flier:

Join us & spread the word! In coordination with our coalition: Al-Awda Coalition, Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP)-FL, POWIR, Broward Green Party, CAIR, National Lawyers Guild (South Florida), Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) – FAU, and Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) – FIU.



Two groups in particular, CAIR and ICNA, caught Avel’s eye because they aspire to invitations to the White House, appearances on network television and at leading universities, and other signs of public acceptance. What took place in Miami, she correctly noted, reveals their true extremism.

Six days later, on July 29, CAIR’s Florida chapter responded with a denial:

CAIR-Florida was not part of, did not plan, did not sponsor, did not participate in, and had absolutely nothing to do with the July 20 rally. If any document lists CAIR-Florida as a sponsor of the event, that listing was included without CAIR-Florida’s permission.



I doubt the veracity of this denial for several reasons.

  • CAIR’s mendacity is so widespread that I have an entire bibliography of my writings exposing the reasons not to trust it.
  • The flier, of which I have a copy, twice states that Sofian Zakkout organized the rally. Zakkout is so close to CAIR, he’s effectively a staff volunteer: he coordinates with it, is quoted by it, seeks helpfrom it, and is listed as a contact by it. (For more on Zakkout, see Avel’s exposé.) A year earlier, he listed CAIR’s Florida branch on another rally flier. It beggars the imagination that he would list CAIR without authorization.
  • The Facebook page still lists CAIR as a sponsor, two weeks after CAIR’s statement of denial.
  • Perhaps CAIR seeks to conceal the truth through semantics. Both the national organization (on the Facebook page) and the Florida chapter (on the flier) are listed as sponsors. The July 29 statement only denies permission from the latter, not the former. It is more than credible that CAIR nationalgave its permission to be listed as a sponsor while CAIR’s Florida chapter did not.

Given these facts, I disbelieve CAIR’s statement.

I do believe it sponsored the vile event in Miami; that its denial of that sponsorship is false; and that the despicable words at the Miami rally revealed the true face of CAIR.

CAIR must not be validated by invitations and appearances. It should be treated as a marginal and despised group like the Ku Klux Klan or the Nation of Islam.

Daniel Pipes (DanielPipes.org) is president of the Middle East Forum. © 2014 by Daniel Pipes. All rights reserved.

 

Also see:

1053

Prominent Islamists Blast NSA for Monitoring Emails

Nihad Awad, (r) founder and executive director of CAIR, the Council on American Islamic Relations.

Nihad Awad, (r) founder and executive director of CAIR, the Council on American Islamic Relations.

Surveillance of a handful of Islamists who been supportive of terror groups is hardly unjust or a persecution of all Muslim Americans.

BY RYAN MAURO:

A 45-member coalition — including the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), two U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entities with extremist histories — is accusing the Obama and Bush Administrations of persecuting the entire Muslim-American community by monitoring the emails of five Muslims with links to terrorists.

The coalition is responding to a new report based on classified documents leaked by former National Security Agency (NSA) employee Edward Snowden. It focuses on the monitoring of five Muslim-American activists, including CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad. The authors of the report are Glenn Greenwald, who has spoken for at least three CAIR fundraisers, and Murtaza Hussain.

The documents provide about 7,500 email addresses monitored by the U.S. government between 2002 and 2008. This is not a shocking number, especially considering the activists’ histories and that there are 2.75 million Muslim-Americans.

Of these, only 202 are listed as Americans and some of these are multiple accounts held by one user. The authors of the report were able to identify five activists who were being monitored.

The Director of National Intelligence said in a statement it is “entirely false that U.S. intelligence agencies conduct electronic surveillance of political, religious or activist figures solely because they disagree with public policies or criticize the government, or for exercising constitutional rights.”

Rather, before monitoring, an independent judge from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court must be persuaded that there is strong enough evidence that the subject is linked to terrorism or under the control of a foreign power.

Public information, much of it cited by the authors, links each of the five to Islamist terrorists. The authors of the report admit they do not know what classified information the NSA and FBI is in possession of; nor do they have any evidence that the NSA failed to get a judge’s approval as required.

Yet, the monitoring of these five activists’ emails is depicted as a scandal by the authors of the report and the coalition, depicting this as an assault on the entire Muslim-American community. Further, the coalition includes groups with their own checkered histories like CAIR, the Islamic Society of North America, the Muslim Public Affairs Council, the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee and the Muslim Legal Fund of America.

There are very strong grounds to believe that the government has legitimate reasons for monitoring the five activists. They are as follows:

Read more at Clarion Project

Glenn Greenwald Enraged that Muslims with Terror Ties Under Surveillance

Screen-Shot-2014-07-09-at-1.03.34-PM-448x350by :

Glenn Greenwald and his fellow jihad-enabling “journalist” Murtaza Hussain on Wednesday published a major exposé, “Under Surveillance: Meet the Muslim-American Leaders the FBI and NSA Have Been Spying On,” about Muslim leaders who are being spied upon by the FBI and the NSA. The thrust of the article is that each one is as pure as the day is long, with the one sin of opposing U.S. government policies.

The idea, of course, that opposing U.S. government policies from the Left will get you placed under surveillance these days is beyond ridiculous: Obama’s IRS is targeting conservative groups, not Leftists, and claiming that “right-wing extremists” are a terror threat, with nary a word about genuinely violent Left-wing extremist groups such as the Occupy movement and others.

And so it is no surprise that Greenwald and Hussain make their case by glossing over the genuine reasons why the FBI and NSA have placed these men under surveillance — surveillance which, if it is still going on at this point, is sure to end now as a result of this article. The article highlights these five men, glossing over the very real reasons why surveillance is justified:

• Faisal Gill, a longtime Republican Party operative and one-time candidate for public office who held a top-secret security clearance and served in the Department of Homeland Security under President George W. Bush;

• Asim Ghafoor, a prominent attorney who has represented clients in terrorism-related cases;

• Hooshang Amirahmadi, an Iranian-American professor of international relations at Rutgers University;

• Agha Saeed, a former political science professor at California State University who champions Muslim civil liberties and Palestinian rights;

• Nihad Awad, the executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the largest Muslim civil rights organization in the country….

Regarding Faisal Gill, Greenwald and Hussain write:

…After leaving the Navy, Gill worked as a consultant for the American Muslim Council, which was founded by the political activist Abdul Rahman al-Amoudi to encourage participation by American Muslims in the political process. A Republican since high school, Gill joined the Bush Administration in the aftermath of 9/11, eventually moving to the White House Office of Homeland Security, where he briefly worked with Richard Clarke and obtained a top-secret security clearance. After roughly a year, he joined the Department of Homeland Security as a senior policy adviser, where he was cleared to access sensitive compartmented information, a classification level reserved for some of the nation’s most closely held secrets.

In 2003, al-Amoudi was arrested for participating in a Libyan plot to assassinate Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah and for illegal financial transactions with the Libyan government, crimes for which he eventually pleaded guilty. Because Gill’s name had turned up in al-Amoudi’s papers, he was investigated by DHS security officials and asked not to report to work pending the outcome. He told investigators that he had met al-Amoudi only three or four times and didn’t work closely with him during his time at the American Muslim Council. After passing a polygraph test, Gill says, he was told by DHS that he was “good to go” and returned to work.

Greenwald and Hussain here establish the pattern of their entire piece: they leave out crucial details of the background of each of their supposed innocent victims of surveillance, thereby obscuring why they were put under surveillance in the first place. Faisal Gill worked as a consultant for the American Muslim Council. He says that he only met Alamoudi a few times and didn’t work closely with him.

Very well. But Greenwald and Hussain don’t mention that, according to Discover the Networks, the plot to assassinate Abdullah involved “two U.K.-based al Qaeda operatives,” and that he “ultimately pled guilty to, and was convicted of, being a senior al Qaeda financier who had funneled at least $1 million into the coffers of that terrorist organization.”

So here is Faisal Gill, who was a consultant for a group founded and headed by a confessed senior al Qaeda financier. He hardly knew him — fine. He was cleared of any wrongdoing — fine. But is it not possible that Alamoudi or someone connected to him might try to contact Faisal Gill, and win this upstanding American patriot over to their side, or try to use him in some way? Is there not, then, a case for placing Faisal Gill under surveillance, given his association with a senior jihad terror financier?

Also, would Greenwald and Hussain be enraged if the FBI and NSA placed under surveillance someone who had worked as a consultant for a group headed by a senior Ku Klux Klan financier, even if the consultant had been cleared of any wrongdoing? I doubt it. Nor should they be.

Likewise with Asim Ghafoor:

In 2003, the Al Haramain Islamic Foundation, a Saudi charity, hired Ghafoor after its U.S. assets were frozen by the Treasury Department over claims that it funded terrorist operations. The government alleged that there were “direct links” between the U.S. branch of the charity and Osama bin Laden. Al Haramain had previously been represented by some of the biggest and most prestigious American law firms, including the D.C. powerhouse Akin Gump. Ghafoor’s work with Al Haramain led him to other controversial clients, including Mohammed Jamal Khalifa, a brother-in-law of Osama bin Laden who was the subject of FBI and CIA surveillance for years, as well as the government of Sudan.

This would seem to be enough in itself to keep Ghafoor under surveillance, in case one of his jihad terrorist clients gave out information that could stop a jihad terror attack. But there is more. Discover the Networks notes that “Asim Ghafoor was a political consultant, spokesman, and public relations director for the Global Relief Foundation (GRF), which the U.S. government shut down in December 2001 because of the organization’s ties to terrorism….GRF is not the only organization with ties to terrorism with which Ghafoor has been involved. While he was with GRF, Ghafoor was also the spokesman for Care International. The December 6, 2002 Wall Street Journal reports: ‘Records indicate close ties between [Care International] and the Boston branch of Al Kifah Refugee Center, the Brooklyn branch of which was named by prosecutors as the locus of the 1993 conspiracy to bomb the World Trade Center.”

Greenwald and Hussain don’t mention any of that, of course. And their inclusion of Hooshang Amirahmadi is just bizarre. Greenwald and Hussain note that he “does not self-identify as a Muslim and describes himself as an atheist.” So why is he included in a piece entitled “Meet the Muslim-American Leaders the FBI and NSA Have Been Spying On”? Apparently Greenwald and Hussain couldn’t find enough Muslim leaders whom they could even with the remotest plausibility portray as innocent victims of unwarranted surveillance, so they figured an Iranian atheist was close enough.

If a foe of jihad terror were that careless of the facts, Greenwald and Hussain would be among the first to pounce.

Read more at Front Page

Misleading Claims by Greenwald and New York Times on NSA/FBI Spying on American Muslims

867699397CSP, By Fred Fleitz:

The newest NSA document leaked by former NSA technician Edward Snowden indicates that NSA and FBI monitored the emails of seven prominent American Muslims.  While Snowden’s supporters are trying to spin this story as discrimination against Muslims and another case of illegal surveillance by NSA, such claims look far-fetched since this email monitoring took place with the approval of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance (FISA) Court and appeared to involve persons suspected of having links to Hamas, Hezbollah, al-Qaeda, and Iran.

This NSA document in question was described in an article in “The Intercept,” an online publication founded by Glenn Greenwald, a former London Guardian writer who facilitated most of Snowden’s leaks, and is funded by eBay founder Pierre Omidyar.  Greenwald is the co-author of the article.

The seven American Muslims named in Greenwald’s article are:

  • Anwar al-Awlaki, a Yemeni-American member of al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula who was killed in a targeted U.S. drone strike in Yemen on September 30, 2011.
  • Samir Khan, an American Muslim who collaborated with al-Awaki and helped produce Inspire, an online al-Qaeda publication used by the Tsaranev brothers to construct the pressure-cooker bombs they detonated at the 2013 Boston Marathon.  Khan was killed by the same drone strike that killed Awaki.
  • Nihad Awad, the executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).
  • Hooshang Amirahmadi, a Rutgers University professor who is president of the American Iranian Council.
  • Asim Ghafoor, a defense lawyer who has handled terrorism-related cases.
  • Faisal Gill, a former Department of Homeland Security lawyer who Greenwald says did legal work with Ghafoor on behalf of Sudan in a lawsuit brought by victims of terrorist attacks.
  • Agha Saeed, the national chairman of the American Muslim Alliance.

The NSA document listed 202 emails belonging to U.S. persons, 1,782 to non-U.S. persons and 5.501 listed as “unknown.”

Greenwald and the New York Times try to depict this surveillance as another example of the U.S. government spying on the American people in violation of the fourth amendment.  Both the Times and Greenwald suggest these men were monitored because they are Muslims.

Greenwald and the Times seem to recognize that government monitoring of the communications of al-Awlaki and Khan was a no-brainer.  For the other five, Greenwald says “it is impossible to know why their emails were monitored or the extent of the surveillance” and noted that they have not been charged with a crime.

But a closer look at Awad, Ghafoor, Gill, Saeed, and Amirahmadi suggests the government likely had good reasons to request court warrants to monitor their communications.

The Times said Awad’s CAIR organization is “a Muslim civil rights organization.”  However, the Times also notes that CAIR has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and in 2007 was an unindicted co-conspirator in its prosecution of the Holy Land Foundation, a Muslim charity later convicted of providing material support for terrorism by funneling money to Hamas.

The Times described Saeed’s American Muslim Alliance as an organization “which supports Muslim political candidates.”  But Investor’s Business Daily reported on April 1, 2014 that Saeed’s American Muslim Alliance joined a coalition of other American Muslim organizations with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood – including CAIR – to launch their own political network to turn American Muslims into an Islamist voting bloc.

Greenwald’s article says Asim Ghafoor is an attorney hired in 2003 by the al-Haramain Islamic Foundation, a Saudi charity with alleged links to al-Qaeda, after its U.S. assets were frozen by the Treasury Department over claims that it funded terrorist operations.  According to the article, Ghafoor and al-Haramain sued the U.S. government and were awarded damages over government eavesdropping on Ghafoor’s attorney-client communications with al-Haramain.  The damages were later dropped on appeal.   According to Greenwald, Ghafoor claims the government monitored his communications “because of his name, his religion, and his legal work.”

Greenwald provides some idea as to about why Faisal Gill’s communications were monitored: he was a consultant for the American Muslim Council, a group founded by Abdul Rahman al-Amoudi who pleaded guilty in 2004 on financial and conspiracy charges for being a senior financier for Al Qaeda. He is serving a 23-year prison sentence.  Greenwald says Gill may have had troubling ties to al-Amoudi.  According to the Greenwald article:

“In 2003, al-Amoudi was arrested for participating in a Libyan plot to assassinate Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah and for illegal financial transactions with the Libyan government, crimes for which he eventually pleaded guilty. Because Gill’s name had turned up in al-Amoudi’s papers, he was investigated by DHS [Department of Homeland Security] security officials and asked not to report to work pending the outcome. He told investigators that he had met al-Amoudi only three or four times and didn’t work closely with him during his time at the American Muslim Council. After passing a polygraph test, Gill says, he was told by DHS that he was “good to go” and returned to work.”

Hooshang Amirahmadi is a former candidate for the Iranian presidency with ties to Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Iranian government.

Greenwald does not know the U.S. government’s justification for requesting court warrants to monitor the communications of Awad, Ghafoor, Gill, Saeed, and Amirahmadi.  He therefore does not know whether these men were collaborating in some way with foreign terrorist organizations or Iran.  However, since Greenwald knew about their suspicious affiliations, it was extremely dishonest for him to claim these are innocent American Muslims targeted by for illegal NSA and FBI electronic surveillance merely because of their ethnicity and religion.

Fred Fleitz, a former CIA analyst, is a Senior Fellow with the Center for Security Policy and Chief Analyst with LIGNET.com.

The 20th Anniversary of CAIR’s Original Sin

CAIR turns 20CSP, by Kyle Shideler:

The Council on American Islamic Relations has recently released a video of CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad, on the occasion of CAIR’s 20th anniversary.  That seems like a good time to remind ourselves of the circumstances of CAIR’s founding.

As much as they might fight it, or try to deny it, 20 years ago CAIR was born of an original sin.

It’s founders were all members of the Palestine Committee of the Muslim Brotherhood of North America, which is to say the committee of the Muslim Brotherhood dedicated to providing material support for HAMAS in North America.

The 1993 meeting in Philadelphia where Omar Ahmad and Nihad Awad proposed the formation of  the organization that would become CAIR was under surveillance by the FBI. The same tapes where Omar Ahmad discusses the difficulty of finding “available people whom we could dedicate for the work we want to hide,” also contains references to using the code “Sister Samah” to refer to Hamas.

Additionally, CAIR was included on a 1994 Muslim Brotherhood list of “working organizations” of the Palestine Committee, which is the same designation held by the indicted (and convicted) Holy Land Foundation.

As noted by Federal Judge Jorge Solis in his ruling on CAIR’s efforts to remove itself from a list of unindicted co-conspirators, there exists, “sufficiency of evidence to show their [CAIR’s] association with HLF, IAP, and Hamas.”  This same evidence was sufficient for the FBI to formally terminate its association with CAIR-National, although according to an Inspector General report, individual FBI offices have continue to violate congressional mandates and headquarters guidance and meet with CAIR representatives.

Since its days as conspirator organized to further the agenda of Hamas/The Muslim Brotherhood, active and former CAIR employees have been arrested on charges including: terrorism-finance, possession of weapons and explosives, and fraud. Other prosecutions, have reportedly been scuttled, thanks to CAIR’s political influence.

CAIR has indeed had a long and, sadly, successful journey. But it cannot escape its Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas origins.

Genesis of the U.S. Council of Muslim Organizations Muslim Brotherhood Political Party

1137918182

As the 2016 presidential election cycle heats up, the USCMO initiative to fortify Muslim citizenship rights “by conducting a census of American Muslims to create a database that will be used to enhance civic and political participation in upcoming elections,” shows all the outward signs that the Muslim Brotherhood actively is working to create the equivalent of the Republican Party’s GOP Data Center, formerly known as Voter Vault.

Center for Security Policy:

Executive leadership from some of the most prominent American Muslim organizations announced the formation of the United States Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO) on Wednesday, 12 March 2014 at the National Press Club in Washington, DC. The eight founding Muslim organizations participating at the press conference were immediately joined by two additional U.S. Muslim organizations. Key Muslim leadership representatives spoke about the vision and mission of the USCMO and appeared in the following order:

  • Ousama Jammal, Secretary General USCMO and past President of The Mosque Foundation
  • Naeem Baig, President, Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA)
  • Nihad Awad, National Executive Director, Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)
  • Mazen Mokhtar, Executive Director, Muslim American Society (MAS)
  • Imam W. Deen Mohammed II, President, The Mosque Cares (grandson of the NOI founder)
  • Khalil Meek, Executive Director, Muslim Legal Fund of America (MLFA)
  • Imam (Name), American Muslim Alliance (AMA)
  • Osama Abuirshaid, National Board Member, American Muslims for Palestine (AMP)
  • Imam Talib Abdur-Rashid, Deputy Emir, Muslim Alliance in North America (MANA)
  • Mahdabuddin Ahmad, Director of Community Affairs, Muslim Ummah of North America (MUNA)

The USCMO is described as an umbrella organization – and CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad inferred that and more, with his assertion regarding the USCMO that “This is the dream of every American Muslim, to unify the approach, agenda and vision of the Muslim community. In the past, many people have tried to unite on a limited agenda, but this is a broad agenda for the American Muslim community.” Awad stressed the need for a “platform to coordinate, to communicate, and unify the vision on critical issues both to the Muslim community and the society at large,” because he believes that “Muslim voters can be swing voters in key elections, especially 2016.” The formation of the USCMO marks the first U.S. Muslim Brotherhood political party, and indeed the first religious identity political party in the history of this country.

USCMO founding members CAIR and ICNA were previously identified as front groups for the Muslim Brotherhood during the Holy Land Foundation (HLF) trial in 2007. Sheikh Kifah Mustapha, who has worked with Ousama Jammal (current Mosque Foundation board member) at The Mosque Foundation, was listed by name as an unindicted co-conspirator in the HLF trial as a member of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee. According to documents entered into evidence at the HLF trial, he was a “registered agent for HLF in Illinois” who acknowledged fundraising for the HLF from the mid-1990s until 2001. Mustapha has also raised money for MAS and ICNA initiatives during their annual conferences in Chicago.

It is important to note the geo-political influence of the Muslim Brotherhood in Illinois, as this relates to the oversight of USCMO’s founding member organizations.

USCMO member organizations with headquarters in Illinois include the following:

USCMO member organizations with regional offices in Illinois include the following:

During the press conference, Nihad Awad indicated his organization CAIR was “proud to join this historic organization, because today is a historic one. We have been meeting for at least one and a half years.” However, the information absent from this discussion by Awad and his colleagues was that the development of the USCMO not only predates the eighteen month time frame, but finds its origins in the Chicago metropolitan area, where the Muslim Brotherhood has successfully built a strategic organizational network for almost six decades.

Read more

Great Idea, Ibrahim Hooper!

The Roots of CAIR’s Intimidation Campaign

pic_giant_041214_SM_The-Roots-of-CAIRs-Intimidation-Campaignby ANDREW C. MCCARTHY:

Author’s Note: This week, capitulating to Islamic-supremacist agitation led by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Brandeis University reneged on its announced plan to present an honorary degree to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the heroic human-rights activist. In my 2010 book, The Grand Jihad, I devoted a chapter to the origins and purposes of CAIR, its roots in the Muslim Brotherhood’s Hamas-support network, and its aim to silence critics of Islamic supremacism. In light of the continuing success of this campaign – despite a federal terrorism-financing prosecution that exposed CAIR’s unsavory background – it is worth revisiting that history. What follows is an adapted excerpt from that chapter.

In January 1993, a new, left-leaning U.S. administration, inclined to be more sympathetic to the Islamist clause, came to power. But before he could bat an eye, President Bill Clinton was confronted by the murder and depraved mutilation of American soldiers in Somalia. A few weeks later, on February 26, jihadists bombed the World Trade Center. The public was angry and appeasing Islamists would have to wait.

Yasser Arafat, however, sensed opportunity. The terrorist intifada launched at the end of 1987 had been a successful gambit for the Palestine Liberation Organization chief. Within a year, even as the body count mounted, the weak-kneed “international community” was granting the PLO the right to participate (though not to vote) in U.N. General Assembly sessions. And when Arafat made the usual show of “renouncing” terrorism – even as he was orchestrating terrorist attacks in conjunction with Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and other Islamist factions – the United States recognized him as the Palestinians’ legitimate leader, just as the Europeans had done. Arafat blundered in 1991, throwing in his lot with Saddam Hussein during the Gulf War, and that seemed to bury him with the Bush 41 administration. But Clinton’s election was a new lease on life.

Anxious to chase the holy grail of Middle East peace and suddenly in need of demonstrating toughness against jihadist terror, the new “progressive” president was made to order for the wily Marxist terror master. If Arafat could resell his “I renounce terrorism” carpet yet again, chances were he could cash in. And so he did, purporting to commit the Palestinians to the 1993 Oslo Accords – an empty promise of peaceful coexistence exchanged for hundreds of millions in aid (much of which he pocketed), an open invitation to the Clinton White House (where he became a regular visitor), international recognition (as a statesman, no less!), and a ludicrous Nobel Peace Prize (forever degrading a once prestigious honor into a punch line).

The Muslim Brotherhood, for one, was not amused. Islamists had murdered Egyptian president Anwar Sadat in 1981 for striking a peace pact with Israel. Sure, they knew Arafat and understood what chicanery he was up to. But acceptance of the Zionist entity’s right to exist was utterly unacceptable, even if done as a ploy.

Israel, the Brotherhood also realized, would not be the only thing squeezed by Clinton at Arafat’s urging. After a shaky start, the new president was winning global plaudits for his Orwellian “peace process.” Clinton must have known that Arafat was stringing him along, but with the theater of negotiation and ostensible progress drawing rave reviews, that was a problem for another day. The immediate concern was that Hamas jihadists could spoil the show with their implacable jihad, their blunt insistence that nothing less than Israel’s obliteration would satisfy them. That gave the fledgling administration a powerful incentive to crack down on them. Arafat would be the beneficiary as the Americans squeezed his rivals for power.

A ‘Media Twinkle’ in Philadelphia
Though the United States had been a cash cow for Hamas, it was thus a perilous time for the organization when 25 of its members and supporters gathered at a Marriott Hotel in Philadelphia on October 27, 1993. They were unaware that the FBI was monitoring their deliberations. The confab was a brainstorming exercise: How best to back Hamas and derail Oslo while concealing these activities from the American government?

A little more background to the Philadelphia meeting: For nearly two decades until his extradition in 1997, Hamas leader Musa Abu Marzook was the most consequential Muslim Brotherhood operative in the United States. Now living in Egypt, he remains to this day deputy chairman of Hamas’s political bureau. In the early Nineties, he actually ran the terrorist organization from his home in Virginia.

During his time in the U.S., Marzook formed several organizations to promote the Palestinian jihad against Israel. In 1981, for public-relations purposes, he established the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP) in conjunction with two other jihadists: future Hamas chief Khalid al-Mishal and Sami al-Arian (the latter was eventually convicted of conspiring to support Palestinian Islamic Jihad).

In December 1987, the intifada was launched and Hamas was born. Marzook immediately formed the “Palestine Committee” to serve as an umbrella organization, directing the various pro-Hamas initiatives that were developing. He brought under its wing both the IAP (which concentrated on “the political and media fronts”) and a fundraising entity he had established. That entity would eventually be called the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) – though it was then known as the “Occupied Land Committee.” The reorganization would better enable the Palestine Committee to comply with the Muslim Brotherhood’s instructions to “increase the financial and the moral support for Hamas,” to “fight surrendering solutions” (like Oslo), and to publicize “the savagery of the Jews.”

It was under the auspices of the Palestine Committee that the 1993 Philadelphia meeting was convened. It was clear even then that Marzook’s Hamas network was anticipating the birth of yet another organization. The Palestine Committee’s amended by-laws declared that an as-yet-unnamed entity was already in the larval stage, “operat[ing] through” the IAP, and soon to “become an official organization for political work, and its headquarters will be in Washington, insha Allah.”

In the United States, the “political work” was crucial. The overarching mission, of course, was quite clear. As the IAP had explained in a December 1988 edition of its Arabic magazine, Ila Filastin, “The call for jihad in the name of Allah is the only path for liberation of Palestine and all the Muslim lands. We promise Allah, continuing the jihad way and the martyrdom’s way.” But while blatant summonses to jihad might stir the faithful in Islamic countries openly hostile to Jews, they were not going to fly in America – and even less so in an America whose financial heart had just been shaken by the jihadist bombing of the World Trade Center. The Brotherhood’s approach in the U.S. would have to be more subtle.

That was where the new organization would come in, as those gathered in Philadelphia – including Marzook’s brother-in-law and HLF co-founder Ghassan Elashi – explained. Although the Brotherhood had ideological depth and impressive fundraising mechanisms, Marzook had long been concerned that his network lacked the media and political savvy needed to advance an agenda in modern America. Now more than ever, they needed what HLF’s Shukri Abu Baker called “a media twinkle.”

In the U.S., Hamas was now perceived as the principal enemy of the popular “peace process.” After all, its charter explicitly called (and continues to call) for Israel’s annihilation by violent jihad. Therefore, its known supporters – the Muslim Brotherhood, the Palestine Committee, the IAP, and the others – were tainted in the American mind as terror-abettors, hostile to U.S. interests. As one attendee urged in Philadelphia, “We must form a new organization for activism which will be neutral, because we are placed in a corner. . . . It is known who we are. We are marked.” The new entity, by contrast, would have a clean slate. Maybe it could steal a page out of Arafat’s “hear what I say, don’t watch what I do” playbook. The new entity’s Islamism and Hamas promotion would have to be less “conspicuous.” It would need to couch its rhetoric in sweet nothings like “social justice,” “due process,” and “resistance.” If it did those things, though, it might be more attractive . . . and effective. A Muslim organization posing as a civil-rights activist while soft-pedaling its jihadist sympathies might be able to snow the American political class, the courts, the media, and the academy. It might make real inroads with the transnational progressives who dominated the Clinton administration.

Read more: Family Security Matters

Muslim Brotherhood Launches Own U.S. Political Party

u-s-council-of-muslim-organizations-uscmoIslamofascism: With an eye toward the 2016 election, the radical Muslim Brotherhood has built the framework for a political party in America that seeks to turn Muslims into an Islamist voting bloc.

‘Muslim voters have the potential to be swing voters in 2016,” said Nihad Awad in launching the benign-sounding U.S. Council of Muslim Organizations, whose membership reads like a Who’s Who of Brotherhood front groups.

“We are aiming to bring more participation from the Muslim community.”

USCMO also aims to elect Islamists in Washington, with the ultimate objective of “institutionalizing policies” favorable to Islamists — that is, Shariah law.

This development bears careful monitoring in light of the U.S. Brotherhood’s recently exposed goal to wage a “civilization jihad” against America that explicitly calls for infiltrating the U.S. political system and “destroying (it) from within.”

The subversive plan was spelled out in hundreds of pages of founding archives that the FBI confiscated from a Brotherhood leader’s home in the Washington suburbs after 9/11.

Translated from Arabic, the secret documents listed a number of Brotherhood front organizations — some of which just happen to make up the newly formed USCMO.

Front and center is the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations, the catalyst behind this Trojan horse jihadist political party.

CAIR is linked in federal criminal court documents to the terrorist group Hamas, the Brotherhood’s Palestinian branch. CAIR’s chief Awad, who announced the USCMO at the National Press Club, is so radioactive, the FBI refuses to do outreach with him and his so-called Muslim-rights group until it can “resolve whether there continues to be a connection between its executives and Hamas.”

Read More At Investor’s Business Daily

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

Walid Shoebat has more to say on this:

CAIR Leader helps Muslim Brotherhood Launch Political Party in the U.S.

On its website, the USCMO even describes itself as “an umbrella group” for Muslims. Founding members of this USCMO are proven ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and include the Muslim American Society (MAS), the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and others. Of course, it’s easy to see how the Muslim Brotherhood would be the “umbrella group” for the USCMO.

It’s not uncommon for the Muslim Brotherhood to have a separate, political party that does its bidding. In Egypt, the Freedom and Justice Party was one such entity and it was the party of Mohammed Mursi, who is now in jail and identified as a leader of a terrorist organization, a designation the new government in Egypt has given to the group.

Awad knows what it’s like to wield influence in Washington, D.C. As head of CAIR, he led one of the many groups that gained access to the George W. Bush White House both before and after 9/11/01. In fact, Awad, along with Dr. Yahya Basha, who was president of the now-defunct American Muslim Council, Salam Al-Marayati, the Executive Director of the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), and Muzammil Siddiqi, then-President of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), were all relied upon by the Bush administration to help develop the dangerously flawed strategy of what was actually Muslim Brotherhood outreach.

UK Muslim Brotherhood Leader Featured Speaker At US Muslim Brotherhood Conference; US Officials Also Present

Anas Al-Tikriti

Anas Al-Tikriti

By gmbwatch:

The Muslim American Society (MAS) has announced that UK Muslim Brotherhood leader Anas Altikriti was scheduled to speak last week at a Washington DC conference titled ”Preserving Our Humanity, A Challenge for Democracy” and sponsored by the MAS Public Affairs and Civic Engagement division. According to the announcement, also scheduled to speak at the conference were representatives of the US State and Treasury Departments including Ambassador Richard Schmierer,  Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public Diplomacy in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs. Anas Al-Tikriti himself is the son of Osama Al-Tikriti, one of the leaders of the Iraqi Islamic Party representing the Muslim Brotherhood in that country.  Al-Tikriti is one of the leaders of the British Muslim Initiative (BMI) and the head of Cordoba Foundation, both part of the UK Muslim Brotherhood. The GMDW reported in March that Altikriti, who once supported the Iraqi insurgency against the US, had been part of a White House meeting with an important Iraqi leader that included US President Obama.

The conference sessions at which Al-Tikriti spoke were titled “The Concept of the Arab Spring Versus the Discourse of Extremism” and “Developing the Modern Narrative on Islam and Civic Responsibility.” Altikriti’s co-speaker on the second panel was Dr. Hatem Bazian, President of the Americans for Palestine (AMP),  a Palestinian advocacy group with strong ties to both the US Muslim Brotherhood and to the Hamas support infrastructure in the US. Video from an April 2004 antiwar-rally shows Hatem Bazian calling for an “Intifada” in the US. Other leaders of the US Muslim Brotherhood speaking at the conference included:

  • Dr. Esam Omeish President Center for Libyan-American Strategic Studies and former President of the MAS

According to its website, MAS-PACE is described as follows:

MAS-PACE is a division of the Muslim American Society (MAS) organized as a civic and educational organization. Its primary purpose is to conduct public relations, educate and mobilize the American Muslim community to participate in public affairs and civic activities on a non-partisan basis, and to activate a new generation of community activists.

The MAS was identified in a Hudson Institute report, authored by the GMBDW editor, as a part of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood and closely tied to the Egyptian organization.

That UK Muslim Brotherhood leader Anas Al-Tikriti should appear in the US two times in the last two months in the company of US governmental officials, including at a White House meeting that included President Obama, should raise serious questions about US policy towards the Brotherhood in light of recent developments in the Middle East. Long-time US allies in the Gulf such as the United Arab Emirates, itself engaged in a serious struggle to rid itself of Brotherhood influence, already have serious questions about US policy in the region.

CAIR tries bribery to shut down briefing on Muslim threat

 

Former FBI agent John Guandolo and Culpepper County Sheriff Scott Jenkins at Virginia counterterror training seminar

Former FBI agent John Guandolo and Culpepper County Sheriff Scott Jenkins at Virginia counterterror training seminar

WND, March 10, 2014:

Despite pressure tactics, threats and even a $15,000 cash bribe from the Council on American-Islamic Relations to shut down a recent counter-terrorism training program for Virginia law enforcement, the training took place as scheduled, albeit with extra security.

It was one of the rare times government officials have not backed down under the group’s pressure tactics.

Washington-based CAIR, an Islamic lobbying group shunned by the FBI due to its ties to terrorist groups, launched a weeks-long campaign to intimidate Culpepper County Sheriff Scott Jenkins into canceling the three-day program, titled “Understanding and Investigating Jihadi Networks in America.”

But Jenkins was not deterred, even after agreeing to meet with CAIR officials.

The lead trainer, former special FBI agent John Guandolo, presented some 50 Virginia law enforcement officers with evidence of the radical Muslim Brotherhood’s operations in the U.S. and their jihadi support network, along with a large amount of evidence demonstrating CAIR was created and continues to be an entity of Hamas, a U.S.-designated terror group. Former U.S. prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy, former Pentagon inspector general Joseph Schmitz and former CIA case officer Clare Lopez also spoke at the seminar.

Now a counter-terrorism and homeland security consultant, Guandolo detailed for officers who attended the Feb. 25-27 seminar how this dangerous Islamic network in America radicalizes, trains and logistically supports jihadi operations in the United States and those launched from the U.S. against overseas targets.

He says CAIR, which is part of that network, was so worried about the training that it sent officials to Culpepper to lobby the sheriff to cancel the program, even offering together with a local mosque to pay for the program’s fees and related expenses.

“They were so bent on making sure this training did not take place that they offered to pay Sheriff Jenkins the entire cost of the training – including travel (expenses) – to keep it from happening,” Guandolo said.

CAIR declined comment.

But CAIR official Corey Saylor told the Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star that he was upset the event got the go-ahead. Saylor, a Muslim convert, said he was “disappointed with the sheriff’s refusal to cancel the training sessions.”

At the same time, CAIR sent letters to the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice and the Rappahannock Regional Justice Academy requesting that officers attending the seminars not be granted the 24 hours of recertification credits the seminars now carry.

Before the event, CAIR put out an “action alert” calling on Muslim-Americans to contact the sheriff’s office to protest the training session. The group claimed Guandolo, whom it described as an “Islamophobe,” was trying to shut down mosques and prevent Muslims from exercising their right to practice their religion. CAIR did not support the claim with any documentation.

Guandolo says it’s a typical “smear tactic” of CAIR.

“Apparently Mr. Saylor is unaware the Department of Justice lists CAIR as a member of Hamas in America” and its parent organization, the Muslim Brotherhood, he said.

In a December 2007 government filing in the U.S. vs. Sabri Benkhala terror case, the Justice Department stated: “From its founding by the Muslim Brotherhood, CAIR conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists.”

In fact, according to the veteran FBI agent, the Justice Department has enough incriminating evidence to file terrorism charges against CAIR and its founders.

“There is enough evidence to indict CAIR, but the government chose not to do so at this time,” said Guandolo, author of “Raising a Jihadi Generation: Understanding the Muslim Brotherhood Movement in America.”

He suggests the government balked at throwing the book at CAIR for political reasons.

CAIR has cultivated a number of political supporters, mainly among leading Democrats in Washington,  including senior White House officials. Secret Service entry logs show CAIR officials have visited the White House several times during the Obama administration.

Despite its designation as an unindicted terrorist co-conspirator in 2007, the Muslim pressure group in recent years has successfully lobbied for changes in federal policies dealing with the war on terror. For example, CAIR took credit for helping persuade Attorney General Eric Holder to prohibit religious profiling in terror cases, a decision his department is expected to soon formally announce. It also played a key role in the Pentagon’s recent decision to change long-standing uniform rules to allow military personnel to wear Islamic beards and head coverings.

Moreover, a controversial new rule issued earlier this month by the departments of State and Homeland Security to relax U.S. immigration for Palestinian and other foreign “refugees” who have provided “limited” material support to terrorists is also an outgrowth of CAIR lobbying.

Under the Bush administration, Justice implicated CAIR in a criminal conspiracy to raise money for Hamas.

CAIR co-founder Omar Ahmad was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the 2007-2008 Holy Land Foundation case. He and CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad remain under FBI investigation, senior FBI officials have confirmed in letters to Congress. Until their ties to Hamas are resolved, the FBI says it will not formally recognize CAIR as a Muslim outreach partner or meet with CAIR officials. The FBI has effectively banned CAIR pending the outcome of the probe.

Starting in the fall of 2008, Guandolo said the FBI “cut off all ties with CAIR because of their ties to Hamas.”

He explained that CAIR was created in 1994 by the U.S. branch of Hamas, known as the “Palestine Committee,” to function as the “political arm” of the Palestinian terrorist group. A year before founding the front group, Ahmad and Awad attended a secret meeting with “senior leaders of Hamas” at a Philadelphia hotel bugged by the FBI. An internal FBI memo written by the former head of the FBI’s counter-terrorism division describes “all attendees” of the meeting – including Ahmad and Awad – as “Hamas members.”

“CAIR was the fourth organization created by Hamas to recruit jihadis, raise money and gain media favor for Hamas in America,” Guandolo said, adding that phone books, organizational charts, secret manifestos written in Arabic and other documents the FBI seized after 9/11 indicate Awad and Ahmad were in leadership positions in the U.S. Palestine Committee prior to the creation of CAIR.

“CAIR is Hamas,” Guandolo flatly stated.

Get the book that takes you inside the secret world of CAIR, “Muslim Mafia.”

Also see:

 

CAIR’s Attack on Zuhdi Jasser’s Funders Raises the Questions: Who is CAIR and Where Does Its Money Come From?

John-G600x338ACT! for America, By John Guandolo:

Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, the founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD), served for eleven years as a medical officer in the United States Navy where he was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal. Dr. Jasser is a Past-President of the Arizona Medical Association, and currently has a private practice in Phoenix specializing in internal medicine and nuclear cardiology.
Dr. Jasser, as many are aware, is an outspoken critic of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Movement in the United States, and is harshly critical of those seeking to impose sharia (Islamic Law) in America. He strongly supports the U.S. Constitution as the supreme law of the land.

Zuhdi Jasser is a patriot, an American hero, and a Muslim – which is why Hamas (doing business as CAIR) is attacking him.

Last week, Hamas (dba CAIR) launched yet another assault on Dr. Jasser. In 2012, CAIR unsuccessfully tried to block his appointment to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), where he currently serves. CAIR is calling on the USCIRF to investigate the sources of funding for Dr. Jasser’s organization AIFD.

The fact that a Hamas organization like CAIR could operate so openly in the U.S. without disruption from the current administration is, in and of itself, astonishing. CAIR’s brazenness in attacking an honorable American like Dr. Jasser begs questions that must be answered – Who is CAIR and Where Does Its Funding Come From?

Let us together take a walk through the place CAIR never wants us to go – into the land of facts and evidence.

CAIR was incorporated in 1994 by Nihad Awad, Omar Ahmad, and Rafeeq Jaber. All three of these men were leaders of the Islamic Association of Palestine (IAP), a now-defunct Hamas organization in the U.S. Musa Abu Marzook, the Deputy Political Chief for Hamas and the Leader of Hamas in the United States (Chairman of the U.S. Palestine Committee), was a member of the IAP Board of Directors. FYI, Hamas is a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) by the U.S. government.

In 1993 and 1994, Omar Ahmad served as the National President for IAP, and from 1994-2005 was the Chairman of the Board for CAIR. Omar Ahmad was also on the Executive Committee of the U.S. Palestine Committee (Hamas). Rafeeq Jaber served as the National President of IAP from 1996-98 and 1999-2005.

U.S. government prosecutors and the Department of Justice identify CAIR as a member of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee, which is Hamas in the United States.

In 1993, the leaders of the U.S. Palestine Committee (Hamas) met in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The meeting was covered by the FBI via physical surveillance, microphones in meeting rooms, and wiretaps on phones. An “Action Memo” from FBI’s Assistant Director for Counterterrorism Dale Watson declared this was a “Meeting among senior leaders of Hamas, the HLFRD, and the IAP.” FBI analysis of the Philadelphia meeting, which was entered into evidence at the US v Holy Land Foundation (hereafter “HLF”) trial reveals “All attendees of this meeting are Hamas members.” Nihad Awad and Omar Ahmad were present at this meeting.

Recorded conversations of this meeting captured Awad and Ahmad discussing the creation of a new public relations organization for Hamas which investigators testified was CAIR, created in summer of 1994, less than a year after the Philadelphia meeting.

The HLF Indictment (2004) states: “The purpose of this (1993 Philadelphia) meeting was to determine their course of action in support of Hamas’ opposition to the peace plan and to decide how to conceal their activities from the scrutiny of the United States government.”

In a 2004 FBI raid at the Annandale, Virginia residence of Ismail Elbarasse, a senior Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood (MB) operative, the archives of the U.S. MB were discovered. One of the documents found lists the leaders of the U.S. Palestine Committee (Hamas) – the names of CAIR founders Nihad Awad and Omar Ahmad (alias Omar Yeheya) are on that list.

Because of the overwhelming evidence that CAIR is a Hamas entity, U.S. prosecutors list CAIR as a member of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee (Hamas) and as an unindicted co-conspirator in the HLF trial – the largest Hamas and terrorism financing trial ever successfully prosecuted in U.S. history.

In the government filing requesting a denial of CAIR’s motion to have its name removed from the Unindicted Co-Conspirator list in the HLF case, U.S. prosecutors state, “The U.S. Muslim Brotherhood created the U.S. Palestine Committee, which documents reflect was initially comprised of three organizations: the OLF (HLF), the IAP, and the UASR. CAIR was later added to these organizations…the mandate of these organizations, per the International Muslim Brotherhood, was to support Hamas.”

In his ruling, the federal Judge in this case, Jorge Solis, stated: “The Government has produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR, ISNA, and NAIT with the HLF, the Islamic Association of Palestine (“IAP”), and with Hamas.”

The question of why the President of ISNA sits on the Department of Homeland Security’s Advisory Committee, works directly with the Secretary of State, briefs National Security staffs, moderates panel discussions at CIA Headquarters, and has been given awards by the FBI will have to be addressed at a later date.

Is anyone else wondering how CAIR and its leaders are allowed to operate freely and unimpeded in America, with their headquarters only a block from the U.S. Capitol?

More evidence…

In the December 2007 government filing in the US v Sabri Benkhala appeal, the government stated: “From its founding by the Muslim Brotherhood leaders, CAIR conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists.” So, CAIR is a Muslim Brotherhood organization which supports terrorists. It would appear federal law is being violated here.

This would explain why CAIR has a long record of defending jihadis and jihadi organizations, while publicly condemning the counterterrorism efforts of the U.S. government and local law enforcement. Noteworthy is CAIR’s vigorous defense of Hamas leader Musa Abu Marzook after his arrest, and their criticism of our government for its investigation and indictment of the Holy Land Foundation – another Hamas entity.

What do senior government officials who have seen the evidence have to say about CAIR?

Former FBI Assistant Director Steve Pomeranz stated: “By masquerading as a mainstream public affairs organization, CAIR has taken the lead in trying to mislead the public about the terrorist underpinnings of militant Islamic movements, in particular, Hamas.”

In a 2003 Senate Sub-Committee hearing on radical Islam, Senator Charles Schumer stated, “To make matters worse, the prominent members of the Council’s (CAIR’s) current leadership who you Mr. Chairman invited to the hearings today – they declined to testify – also have intimate connections with Hamas.”

In June 2009, on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives, Congressman Frank Wolf (VA) gave a lengthy speech in which he laid out a great deal of the evidence against CAIR and its ties to Hamas. The transcript of this speech can be found at http://wolf.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/wolf-gives-major-floor-speech-on-fbis-cooperation-with-cair

In a letter dated April 28, 2009 from the FBI’s Assistant Director, Office of Congressional Affairs, to U.S. Senator John Kyl (AZ), the FBI leader details why the FBI cut off all formal ties to CAIR and identifies it as an unindicted co-conspirator in the HLF trial because of its relationship with Hamas.

In a letter dated February 12, 2010 to U.S. Congresswoman Sue Myrick (NC) from Assistant U.S. Attorney General Ronald Weich, Mr. Weich wrote “Enclosed (is)…evidence that was introduced in that trial (US v HLF) which demonstrated the relationship among CAIR, individual CAIR founders, and the Palestine Committee. Evidence was also introduced that demonstrated a relationship between the Palestine Committee and Hamas.”

Screenshot of scanned check given to Islamic organization Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) by the terrorist organization Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Screenshot of scanned check given to Islamic organization Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) by the terrorist organization Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

For those of you who forgot Junior High School math, please allow me to review: If A=B and B=C, then A=C. There is a relationship between CAIR and the U.S. Palestine Committee. There is a relationship between the U.S. Palestine Committee and Hamas. Therefore, there is a relationship between CAIR and Hamas. As was previously stated, on the order from the International Muslim Brotherhood, the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood created the U.S. Palestine Committee to raise “media, money, men and all that” for Hamas. The U.S. Palestine Committee created four organizations to support Hamas with propaganda, money, and recruits: The Occupied Land Fund (which became the HLF), the Islamic Association of Palestine (IAP), the United Association for Studies and Research (UASR), and CAIR.

In the sporting world we call this a slam dunk. But what about the money CAIR receives. Certainly if they are attacking Dr. Jasser and his organization for improprieties in his sources of funding, CAIR must be squeaky clean, yes?

No, actually.

Actually, the Hamas front called the Holy Land Foundation provided CAIR with $5,000 of seed money shortly after CAIR was founded, and, in return, CAIR raised money for HLF. Is there another violation of U.S. law here?

CAIR has also received funds from overseas organizations like WAMY (World Association of Muslim Youth) and IIRO (International Islamic Relief Organization). Both WAMY and IIRO are Saudi-funded groups whose U.S. offices were raided by the government because of their possible ties to Hamas and Al Qaeda.

Most notably, In 1999, CAIR received $250,000 from a Saudi-based bank headed by the former Director of the Muslim World League (MWL). Osama bin Laden identified MWL as a primary source of funds for Al Qaeda. Federal investigators raided MWL’s U.S. offices. It is not a far reach to see that CAIR received money from a source the leader of Al Qaeda recognized was a “primary” source of funding for AQ.

It should be noted the information in this article is a small amount of the massive evidence revealing the Council on American Islamic Relations is a Hamas entity whose role in the greater Islamic Movement here is to “support terrorists” as the U.S. Department of Justice has stated. They do this in a variety of ways. As a matter of fact, CAIR’s website acknowledges that all money donated to it via zakat goes to jihad fisabillillah – the seventh category under Islamic Law – but maybe we should save that discussion for another article.

As CAIR launches its attacks against honorable Americans like Dr. Zuhdi Jasser who are standing firm on the truth about a real and present threat to the American people and our nation, another question must be asked…

Where are the U.S. agencies charged with protecting and defending Americans like Dr. Jasser, and why are they not shutting CAIR down, arresting its leaders, and seizing all of its assets? Maybe they haven’t seen the facts.

John Guandolo is the founder of UnderstandingtheThreat.com and the author of the book Raising a Jihadi Generation, detailing the Muslim Brotherhood’s Movement in the United States. He works closely with ACT! for America and helped with the creation of ACT’s Thin Blue Line Project which educates law enforcement, military, and intelligence professionals about the threat from the Muslim Brotherhood’s Movement, and gives them investigative tools and strategies for addressing this threat. Mr. Guandolo is a 1989 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, a former active duty combat Marine Infantry and Reconnaissance Officer, and a former Special Agent with the FBI. For more information, please go to www.UnderstandingtheThreat.com.

 

CAIR’s Ayloush Gives Dishonest, Bullying Answer to Hamas Question