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

Isolated Hamas Contemplates Returning to Iran’s Orbit

US designates Deputy Secretary-General of Palestinian Islamic Jihad

Ziyad al Nakhalah Palestinian Islamic Jihad-thumb-560x369-2753Long War Journal, By DAVID BARNETT:

The State Department today designated Ziyad al Nakhalah (Abu Tariq), the Deputy Secretary General of Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT). PIJ has been designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization since October 1997.

Nakhalah “has repeatedly taken credit for attacks against Israel,” the State Department said. In addition, he has “cultivated strong relations with the Government of Iran, the world’s primary State Sponsor of Terrorism.” Nakhalah was one of a number of officials in Palestinian Islamic Jihad to admit that Iran had provided Palestinian terror groups, including PIJ, with Fajr-3 and Fajr-5 missiles that were used during Operation Pillar of Defense in November 2012.

According to the State Department, Nakhalah in 2012 “emphasized the importance of [PIJ's] expanding and improving relations” with Hamas. Indeed, in October 2012, the two Palestinian terror groups announced they were conducting joint operations against Israel. In a recent email exchange with Reuters from Damascus, Nakhalah boasted that “the relation with Hamas is at its best level now.”

In its designation, the State Department noted that PIJ has conducted “numerous attacks, including large-scale suicide bombings against Israeli civilian and military targets,” some of which have killed Americans.

The designation, which stated that PIJ “receives financial assistance and training primarily from Iran,” identified a December 2013 bus bombing as a PIJ operation. On Jan. 2, Israeli authorities announced the arrest of 14 individuals, at least four of whom were PIJ operatives, in connection with the December attack.

Ramadan Shallah, the current PIJ Secretary-General, has been listed as a SDGT since November 1995. Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif earlier this month met with Shallah and other PIJ officials, including the newly designated Nakhalah, in Beirut.

MAS Islamist Hugs for Hatred and Terror

farrBy Joe Kaufman:

It’s said that you wouldn’t want to wish serious illness on your worst enemy. Well, in December 2010, such an illness did indeed come to one of America’s worst enemies, Muslim extremist Mahdi Bray. Bray, then-Executive Director of the MAS Freedom Foundation, the former activist arm of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood front, the Muslim American Society, suffered what was described as a “massive stroke.” Now, three years later, he is back doing what he does best, embracing hatemongers and getting involved in the pro-terror cause.

Johari Abdul-Malik is the Outreach Director of Falls Church, Virginia’s Dar al-Hijrah Islamic Center. He was brought in to head the mosque, after his predecessor, Anwar al-Awlaki, left the United States to become al-Qaeda’s leader in Yemen. Since Abdul-Malik has been employed by al-Hijrah, he has supported and/or defended a number of convicted terrorists, including one that plotted to assassinate Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah; one that plotted to assassinate President George W. Bush; and one who instructed his followers to wage war on the United States.

Abdul-Malik has a YouTube page, where he actively uploads videos. On September 25, he uploaded a 28-second one featuring himself and the Executive Director of the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), Salam al-Marayati. Marayati, who is close to the Obama White House, is a defender of Hezbollah and has previously suggested that Israel be named a suspect in the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon.

However, the main event of Abdul-Malik’s video short was Mahdi Bray and Louis Farrakhan, the controversial leader of the Nation of Islam (NOI), hugging and professing their love for one another.

Farrakhan is known for his inflammatory rhetoric against whites, Jews and homosexuals. He has called whites “potential humans [who] haven’t evolved yet.” He has referred to Jews as “satanic” and “wicked.” And he has called gays “degenerate.” Farrakhan’s group currently publishes a number of anti-Semitic books and DVDs for sale on its website, including such titles as ‘And the Jews Planned’ and ‘Jews Selling Blacks.’

The scene from the video is not the first time Bray has embraced such a vile individual as Farrakhan. In March 2009, a photo of Ahmed Yassin, the former spiritual leader and founder of Hamas who was killed in an Israeli airstrike, was uploaded to Bray’s personal web page found on what used to be a MAS Freedom website. [The MAS Freedom organization was shut down shortly after Bray’s stroke.]

The Muslim American Society was founded in 1992 by associates from the Muslim Brotherhood, including Mohammed Mahdi Akef, who would later become the international head of the Brotherhood. Given the radical roots of the organization, it stands to reason that Bray would cling to such extremism – as he did last month, when he attended an event sponsored by a group advocating for the restoration of the regime of Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohamed Morsi in Egypt. Morsi was taken from power by the Egyptian Military, which has since outlawed the Brotherhood, designating the Islamist group a terrorist organization.

As reported by Steve Emerson and the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT), also attending was ex-USF professor Sami al-Arian, who previously had been sentenced to prison for his role as a North American leader of Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) and is currently under a separate indictment for criminal contempt in another terrorism case.

Read more at Front Page

 

 

Documentary: Palestinian Suicide Terrorists

images (87)LadyKuffar: Stunning documentary about the mindless suicide terrorists of Palestine. Draws interesting links between the impossibility of natural romances and suicide terrorism in the islamic world. Many of the failed terrorists interviewed seem to be mainly motivated by unsubstantiated promises of 72 virgins and guaranteed access of the same number of family members in paradise. At the same time the film clearly indicates that the struggle against Israel is in essence a religious obligation to wipe out the jews, not a fight for freedom.

EXCLUSIVE: Deputy of banned suicide-bomb-endorsing cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi had White House meeting with National Security Council staff

Abdullah bin Bayyah met with members of the Obama administration's national security team on June 13, despite his close ties with a Muslim Brotherhood leader who advocates for the destruction of Israel and has been banned from the U.S. since 1999

Abdullah bin Bayyah met with members of the Obama administration’s national security team on June 13, despite his close ties with a Muslim Brotherhood leader who advocates for the destruction of Israel and has been banned from the U.S. since 1999

by David Martosko
The Daily Mail
June 25, 2013

Islamic Jihad’s Summer of Radicalization

by IPT News:

Sharia banks that fund terrorism

sharia-bank-terror-relationship

Money Jihad:

The relationship is simple.  Jihadists know they can trust sharia-compliant banks to maintain their anonymity, not ask too many questions, and facilitate high-dollar transactions on behalf of their terrorist groups.  Some Islamic financial institutions, such as National Commercial Bank and Islami Bank Bangladesh, have taken the relationship a step farther by donating a portion of their bank profits in the form of zakat as an act of corporate “charity” to terrorist organizations, or in the case of Al Rajhi, through private zakat donations of leading bankers.  Saudi Arabia and Iran are key bases for these activities, but this is a global phenomenon.  Here’s Money Jihad’s short list of the worst offenders:

Al Rajhi Bank:  The Saudi financial institution has served as the sharia bank of choice for the world’s jihadists, including East Africa embassy bomber Mamduh Mahmud Salim, Al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri, and organizations like Indonesian Kompak and Al-Haramain.  Bank co-founder Sulaiman Al-Rajhi appeared on the infamous Golden Chain document of Al Qaeda financiers.  These allegations were reinforced by the recent U.S. Senate investigation into HSBC’s correspondent relationships.

Al Shamal Islamic Bank:  Osama Bin Laden co-founded the Al Shamal in Sudan and invested $50 million there.  During the 1990s and early 2000s, Al Qaeda distributed money to its cells through Al Shamal.  Funds passed through Al Shamal were used in preparation for terrorist attacks.

National Commercial Bank:  Offering conventional and sharia banking services, Saudi Arabia’s self-described first, largest, and most prominent bank is NCB.  Among other misdeeds, a Saudi audit revealed that NCB transferred $74 million in the 1990s as zakat through its charitable front organizations to Al Qaeda (see here, here, and here).  Khalid bin Mahfouz, the head of the bank, exploited libel laws to sue author Rachel Ehrenfeld in an effort to silence accusations about his role in financing terrorism.

Arab Bank:  This conventional bank in Jordan maintains a wholly-owned subsidiary (Islamic International Arab Bank PLC) that offers full-range sharia services.  Arab Bank has transferred money on behalf of Comité de Bienfaisance et de Secours aux Palestiniens (CBSP), a notorious French charity, to a known financial subunit of Hamas.  The Jordanian bank has paid out insurance benefits to families of suicide bombers for the Saudi Committee—another charity that funds Hamas.  Arab Bank has handled transactions for the Holy Land Foundation, whose leaders now sit behind bars for financing terrorism.  It has been the subject of American investigations, but the bank has consistently refused to turn over related documents to the U.S.

Islami Bank Bangladesh Limited:  IBBL, Bangladesh’s biggest sharia bank, has handled Wahhabi accounts to propagate radical Islam since its inception.  In 2011, the Bangladeshi home ministry intelligence revealed that 8 percent of the bank’s profits were diverted as corporate zakat to support jihad in Bangladesh.  One of the men on IBBL’s board of sharia advisors was arrested in connection with a terrorist attack against Bangladeshi police officers.  The U.S. Senate slammed British bank giant HSBC for maintaining relationships with IBBL despite evidence that it served terrorists like Shaikh Abdur Rahman of Jamatul Mujahideen Bangladesh and terror-funding Islamic charities like IIRO.  The Senate’s report also implicated HSBC for disregarding evidence of terror financing at another Bangladeshi sharia bank with whom it worked:  Social Islami Bank.

Bank Melli:  The Iranian Islamic bank sent “at least $100 million to an Iranian Revolutionary Guard branch that supports Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and other terrorist groups, the Quds Force” between 2002-06.

Bank Saderat:  Another major Iranian sharia finance house, the U.S. Treasury Department sanctioned the rocket-funding Bank Saderat, stating that “The bank is used by the Government of Iran to transfer money to terrorist organizations, including Hizballah, Hamas, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. A notable example of this is a Hizballah-controlled organization that has received $50 million directly from Iran through Bank Saderat since 2001.”

Other culprits include Dubai Islamic Bank, which is active in both the U.A.E. and Pakistan, and Tadamon Islamic Bank.

So much for “ethical finance.”  For further developments, please continue reading Money Jihad, Shariah Finance Watch, and @moneyjihad on Twitter.

See also:

What You Should Know About Shariah Compliant Finance (counterjihadreport.com)

Islamic Jihad Considers Move to Cairo

by THE  GLOBAL MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD DAILY REPORT

Saudi media is reporting that according to their sources, the terrorist group Palestinian Islamic Jihad [PIJ] movement is thinking of moving its offices to Cairo or Beirut, because of the deteriorating situation in Damascus and PIJ leaders have met with the leaders of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. According to an Asharq Alawsat report:

Ramallah, Asharq al-Awsat – According to informed Palestinian sources, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad [PIJ] movement is thinking of moving its offices to Cairo or Beirut, because of the deteriorating situation in Damascus. The sources affirmed to Asharq Al-Awsat that PIJ leaders inside and outside [the Palestinian territories] met in Cairo last week in the presence of PIJ Secretary General Ramadan Shallah, his deputy Ziyad al-Nakhalah, and officials from Gaza, including Nafidh Azzam and Khalid al-Batsh and discussed the issue of relocating its operations to Cairo or Beirut. According to the source, which spoke to Asharq Al-Awsat on the condition of anonymity, Shallah suggested at the meeting that work should begin as soon as possible to move the PIJ offices to Cairo or Beirut based on the available capabilities and the position of the country concerned. Some of those present at the meeting supported the proposal while others turned it down. The sources explained that ‘an agreement on one position was not reached because the proponents of the proposal encouraged a quick move while those opposed called for delaying the move until the situation in Syria becomes uncontrollable and the regime falls’. A large delegation headed by Shallah began a visit on Wednesday to the Egyptian capital, Cairo to meet with the new Egyptian leaders and review the current and future Palestinian situation. Shallah met with Dr Muhammad Badi, the controller general of the Muslim Brotherhood movement; Ismail Haniyah, the prime minister of the dismissed cabinet in the Gaza Strip; and Murad Muwafi, director of the Egyptian General Intelligence Directorate. According to the sources, the PIJ officials hinted to Muwafi that they may request opening PIJ offices in the future if the movement’s presence in Syria becomes impossible. The delegation was expected to meet with Egyptian President Muhammad Mursi as announced by Nafidh Azzam, member of the PIJ Political Bureau, who had said that the meeting with Mursi (that did not take place) would review several dossiers, especially the Palestinian issue, and events and developments in the Arab region.

A 2008 Council on Foreign Relations report described the PIJ as:

The Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) is an Islamic, Palestinian nationalist organization that violently opposes the existence of Israel. Designated as a U.S. State Department terrorist organization in 1997, the PIJ targets Israeli civilian and military personnel in its commitment to the creation of an Islamic regime in “all of historic Palestine,” according to the State Department’s 2006 Country Report on terrorism. The PIJ, unlike Fatah or Hamas, does not participate in the political process. The founders of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Fathi Shaqaqi and Abd al-Aziz Awda, were students in Egypt and members of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood until the late 1970s when they decided that the brotherhood was becoming too moderate and insufficiently committed to the Palestinian cause. The PIJ emerged as a separate entity committed to the militant destruction of Israel and the reestablishment of a sovereign Palestinian state. The PIJ, despite being a Sunni group, took inspiration from revolutionary, theocratic Shia ideals espoused during the 1979 Iranian Revolution that established an Islamic regime.

In January, Egyptian media reported that Hamas and Islamic Jihad were holding talks about merging their two factions.

The PIJ leader in the U.S. was known to have been Sami Al-Arian who pleaded guilty to one count of “Conspiracy to make or receive contributions of funds, goods or services to or for the benefit of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), a Specially Designated Terrorist” and was sentenced on May 1, 2006, to 57 months in prison and then to be deported.

For a profile of Al-Arian, go here.

Published at Family Security Matters

Also see PIJ Looks to Ditch Syria; Considering Move to Cairo or Beirut (Investigative project.org)

Romney and the Palestinian Culture of Destruction

By Bruce Thornton:

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney is under attack for speaking an important truth about the Arab-Israeli conflict. At a fundraiser in Jerusalem on Monday, Romney made the obvious, even banal, point about the economic disparity between nations. Speaking of Israel and the Palestinian-run West Bank, Romney said, “Culture makes all the difference.” Rejecting the geographic determinism that claims geography, climate, and species distribution account for the greater power and wealth of the West, Romney added, “you look at Israel and you say you have a hard time suggesting that all of the natural resources on the land could account for all the accomplishment of the people here.” Romney’s point was part of a larger discussion of global economic disparity that he has brought up previously in numerous speeches and in his book No Apology, and that scholars like David Landes and Thomas Sowell have developed in their work.

When it comes to Israel, however, no comment, no matter how sound its scholarly pedigree, that challenges the orthodox narrative favored by the Arabs and their Western shills will be allowed to pass without attack. Saeb Erekat, an aide to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, responded, “It is a racist statement and this man doesn’t realize that the Palestinian economy cannot reach its potential because there is an Israeli occupation.” Hanan Ashrawi, a Palestinian legislator and official in the Palestine Liberation Organization, claimed the Palestinians “have to build an economy when they have no freedom of movement, no human rights, no fundamental freedoms.” International reporting on the remarks backed up the Palestinian interpretation by citing the “occupation” and “blockade” as the real explanation for why the Palestinians are failing economically.

These reactions are drearily predictable, including the incoherent charge of “racism” against somebody making a cultural argument. More important, once again Palestinian revanchist obsessions, anti-Semitism, and the jihadist death cult are ignored, and the reasons for Israeli defensive measures passed over, while Western materialist obsessions like “racism” “colonialism,” and “national aspirations” are used to explain destructive behavior the origins of which lie in cultural and religious dysfunctions.

Thus if you want to explain Palestinian economic backwardness, start with the Arab rejection of Israel’s legitimacy, one grounded in Islamic doctrine and culture. For all the duplicitous talk of the “two-state solution,” a critical mass of Arabs simply does not recognize Israel’s right to exist. Nor is this rejection a consequence of an “illegal occupation” of an “Arab homeland” by neo-colonialist Jews abetted by Western imperialists. When four Arab armies invaded Israel in 1948, its purpose was not to create a Palestinian nation, something that has no historical reality. Rather, after they destroyed Israel, the aggressor nations planned to carve up among themselves what was left of mandatory Palestine. This rejection of Israel has been a constant over the last 60 years, as historian Efraim Karsh points out: “Had Arafat set the PLO from the start on the path to peace and reconciliation, instead of turning it into one of the most murderous terrorist organizations in modern times, a Palestinian state could have been established in the late 1960s or the early 1970s; in 1979 as a corollary to the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty; by May 1999 as part of the Oslo Process; or at the very latest with the Camp David summit of July 2000.”

The fact is, Israel was and is an abomination to Muslims not because there is no Palestinian state, but because it is a country comprising what Muslims consider dhimmi, a conquered inferior people whose lands and lives are forfeit to Muslims by decree of Allah. Nor does it help that Muslims especially loath Jews, hatred based on the authority of the Koran, Hadiths, and 14 centuries of Islamic theology and jurisprudence. Hence the rank anti-Semitism rampant among Palestinian Arabs, who routinely and publicly indulge invective and genocidal rhetoric redolent of Der Stürmer. The continuing existence in the Middle East of an economically and militarily powerful Israel, populated by despised dhimmi, is a daily humiliation for the peoples who consider themselves the “best of nations” destined to rule the world. Ending the “occupation” or lifting the defensive blockade of Gaza wouldn’t change this irrational, religiously sanctioned hatred.

Read more at Front Page

Here is a vivid example of Palestinian “Culture”:

A Mickey Mouse Character on Hamas TV Teaches Children about Islamic Rule of the World: Al-Aqsa TV (Palestinian Authority) – 4/13/2007

 

And don’t forget summer camp… that wonderful opportunity for cultural enrichment and personal growth!

Hamas Summer Camps Are Child Abuse (counterjihadreport.com)

 

The Origins of the Muslim Brotherhood “Project”

By: Patrick Poole
FrontPageMagazine July 24, 2008
In May 2006, when I first introduced American readers to the Muslim Brotherhood strategic plan known as “The Project” (including the first complete English translation of such, published here at FrontPage), very little was known about the document beyond what had been reported in the European press and Swiss journalist Sylvain Besson’s book, La conquête de l’Occident: Le projet secret des Islamistes (Paris: Le Seuil, 2005).

We knew at that time from Besson’s research that the document had been recovered from the home of Yousef Nada, the head of the Al-Taqwa Bank in Lugano and the de facto Foreign Envoy for the international Muslim Brotherhood movement, during a raid of his compound in November 2001 investigating Al-Taqwa’s involvement in terrorism financing. The strategic plan has received considerable discussion and analysis in the Western intelligence community ever since. As Besson notes in his book, Nada admitted that the document was genuine but declined to elaborate about the circumstances of its drafting.

A new book, however, sheds fresh light on the background of “The Project” and offers new details on the fundamental realignment of Muslim Brotherhood strategy and doctrine that it represents. The book in question, HAMAS: A History from Within (Northhampton, Mass.: Oliver Branch, 2007), is authored by a well-known international Muslim Brotherhood operative and HAMAS insider, Azzam Tamimi, who heads the Institute of Islamic Political Thought HAMAS front organization in London.

Tamimi outlines the circumstances and dramatic changes inside the Muslim Brotherhood that led to the adoption of “The Project” strategic plan at the historic 1983 Amman conference of international Muslim Brotherhood leaders. Here’s what Tamimi wrote about that event and the formation of “The Project”:

It is now known that Palestinian Ikhwan [Muslim Brotherhood – ed.] members in the diaspora had also been pressing for military action. Their efforts were assisted by the unification of their organizations at the end of the 1970s, a project that reached its culmination in the historic conference convened secretly in Amman in 1983. Representatives of the Palestinian Ikhwan attended from within Palestine, both from the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, as well as from Jordan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, the other Gulf countries, Europe, and the United States. The purpose of the meeting was to lay the cornerstone for what became known as the Islamic “global project for Palestine,” a project proposed to the conference by the delegates from Kuwait. At this conference, a unanimous decision was taken to give financial and logistic support to the effort of the Ikhwan in Palestine to wage jihad. (p. 45)

What Tamimi describes in his book is that “The Project” represented several fundamental shifts in both ideology and methodology of the global Muslim Brotherhood leadership. Rather than waiting for the creation of an Islamic state that would undertake the liberation of Palestine, they would militarize the Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood organization by reviving the terrorist “secret apparatus”, which would eventually culminate in the announcement of the creation of HAMAS in December 1987 and the unveiling of the HAMAS charter in August 1988.

Thus, the claims of a spontaneous creation of HAMAS at the beginning of the first intifada are entirely myth, as Tamimi claims that military preparations had been long underway and the secret cells made operational years prior to 1987. According to Tamimi’s account, the Palestinian Committee of the Muslim Brotherhood established the Jihaz Filastin (the Palestinian Apparatus) in 1985 to coordinate global activities in support of the new jihadist movement in accordance with “The Project”. Two other organizations were also created by Palestinian Ikhwan leader (and HAMAS founder) Sheikh Ahmed Yasin within the territories along the lines of the : the al-Majahidun al-Filastiniyun (the Palestinian Mujahidin), which would conduct terrorist operations against Israeli military targets; and Majd (glory), an internal security force which would target and kill non-cooperative Palestinians. These would later become active arms within the HAMAS infrastructure.

Two factors contributed to this shift: 1) the failure of outside Arab armies to effect liberation; and 2) the creation of the competing Palestinian Islamic Jihad. The catastrophic military failures of 1967 and 1973 led to Egypt, who bore the brunt of those defeats, signing the Camp David Accords in September 1978 and the Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty of 1979. Those developments dashed the hopes of continued outside military assistance and led to the abandonment of what Tamimi describes as the “Messianic fatalism for the emergence of the Islamic state that would lead the jihad to liberate Palestine” (p. 47).

Inside the Palestinian territories, Fathi Al-Shiqaqi, a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, had launched Al-Tal’I’ Al-Islamiyah (the Islamic vanguards), which later was renamed Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Adopting Muslim Brotherhood ideologue Sayyid Qutb’s revolutionary methodology, Al-Shiqaqi began recruiting for jihad amongst the members of the Ikhwan (which led to his expulsion) and forged an alliance with Saraya al-Jihad, which was already conducting terrorist operations against Israeli military personnel. Among Saraya al-Jihad’s leadership was future Al-Qaeda founder Abdullah Azzam. This new organization and their terrorist operations quickly gathered the attention and support of the younger Palestinians, and threatened the Ikhwan’s position of leadership inside the territories.

The realignment in ideology and methodology amongst the Muslim Brotherhood global leadership by institutionalizing Qutb’s top-down, revolutionary approach also permanently secured Qutb’s ideological dominance throughout the organization. The crackdown in Egypt on the Brotherhood in the 1950s and 1960s led to the scattering of the membership across the Middle East and into the West, which removed the immediate pressure to moderate their ideology. From these new locations, they could fully embrace Qutb’s vanguardist ideology.

The push of the organization into the West was largely the result of the efforts of Said Ramadan, son-in-law of Hassan al-Banna, founder of the Brotherhood (see Ian Johnson’s recent essay on the establishment of the Muslim Brotherhood in the West). Meanwhile, Ikhwan leaders who had sought refuge in Saudi Arabia forged a theological link with Salafi/Wahhabism that has marked the group ever since. Through these leaders in diaspora came the international organizations (Muslim World League, World Assembly for Muslim Youth), financing (various “charities” and the Al-Taqwa Bank, headed by Yousef Nada, in whose possession “The Project” document was found), and ideology that would not only result in the formation of HAMAS, but would influence and support virtually every Islamic terrorist organization in the world.

For this reason, understanding the historic role of “The Project” as part of the global strategy of the Muslim Brotherhood is essential. Fortunately, Azzam Tamimi’s account fills in several blanks that had gone unreported:

  • Its adoption at the 1983 Amman Conference;
  • Its actual title – the “global project for Palestine”;
  • Its origination by the Kuwaiti Ikhwan leadership (Tamimi also reports that they donated $70,000 in start-up money for the Palestinians to buy arms and to send leaders to Jordan for military training);
  • Its strategic role in defining how the Muslim Brotherhood would focus its efforts and resources to Palestine to make that a key issue in advancing their global Islamic supremacist agenda;
  • Its ideological importance representing the shift in methodology to a more revolutionary approach and the embrace of Sayyid Qutb’s vanguardist vision by the organization globally.

Tamimi’s account provides new details about “The Project”, and his status as a high-ranking international Muslim Brotherhood figure adds considerable weight to authenticate much of what had already been reported, notwithstanding some of his revisionist history elsewhere in his book. An examination of that strategic plan, as well as the many exhibits that came from the Holy Land Foundation terrorism finance trial last summer in Dallas (see my colleague LTC Joseph Myers’ overview of those documents) gives us a glimpse at the Muslim Brotherhood’s global playbook and how far they have come in achieving their long-term goals of infiltrating the West and establishing a global Islamic state ruled by Islamic law. What we find by those measures and from seemingly daily reports is that their relentless coordinated campaign for Islamic global dominance has met with astounding success.


Patrick Poole is a regular contributor to Frontpagemag.com and an anti-terrorism consultant to law enforcement and the military.


Candidate For Congress Joe Kaufman Defends NYPD, Tells CAIR Representative He Should Be Watched “24/7″ By Law Enforcement

Militant Islam Monitor:

CAIR’s Cyrus McGoldrick supports leader of Palestinian terrorist group

Republican Candidate for Congress Joe Kaufman defended the New York Police Department (NYPD), during a live spirited debate with the New York representative of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Cyrus McGoldrick, on South Florida’s 880AM ‘Let’s Talk About It.’ They were on the show to discuss the controversy regarding the NYPD surveillance program, which targets a radical segment of the New York area Muslim community. Kaufman took the side of the police, while McGoldrick has been leading the fight against them.

Kaufman pulled no punches, as he identified CAIR’s ties to Hamas and defended the NYPD’s vigilance, reminding us that New York was the target of a number of attacks – including the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, the September 11th attacks, and the failed Times Square bombing – and still is.

Kaufman boldly made an example of CAIR’s McGoldrick himself, exposing the fact that McGoldrick has stated on the web his support for Khader Adnan, a West Bank leader of Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a group that Kaufman revealed conducts suicide bombings against Israeli civilians.

Kaufman stated, “[I]f an individual is posting online their support and prayers for a senior member of Palestinian Islamic Jihad… they should be watched 24/7 by the NYPD.” McGoldrick replied, “I probably am. I probably am.”

Kaufman is running for U.S. Congress in Florida’s District 23. The seat is currently held by the head of the Democratic National Committee, Debbie Wasserman Schultz.