Days Before UAE Terror Designation, CAIR Awards PIJ Board Member

IPT News
November 20, 2014

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

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

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

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

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

[see video]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Grover Norquist & Co. Build Islamist Influence in GOP

Grover at CPACClarion Project, by Ryan Mauro, Tue, March 4, 2014

How the GOP Came to Embrace the Muslim Brotherhood Lobby

Islamism is not a partisan issue. Special interests, major companies and foreign powers have long tried to affect both political parties—and the Muslim Brotherhood lobby is no different. Ten former senior officials, including a former CIA director, have issued a  joint statement with meticulous documentation about how the Republican Party was and is influenced by this lobby.

The Beginning

When the Muslim Brotherhood arrived in the U.S. in the 1960s, it recognized that violent action is counterproductive. Instead, it began political organizing so it could lead the growing Muslim-American community and use it to affect U.S. policy.

In the 1980s, the FBI recruited a confidential source deep inside the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood lobby. He warned that the Brotherhood established a network of front groups including the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), Muslim Students Association,Islamic Society of North America and North American Islamic Trust. One of the chief objectives was to penetrate the U.S. government with sympathizers and IIIT already claimed success.

The network was so impressive that Pakistani intelligence bred itsown influence operation from it in 1990 with the Brotherhood’s support. It donated to campaigns on both sides of the political aisle and met with officials involved in foreign policy.

The U.S. Muslim Brotherhood drafted a secret plan in 1991 that defined its “work in America as a kind of grand jihad…in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within.” It was not a doctrine of violence, but of activism based on aligning with non-Muslim political forces. It listed about 30 of “our organizations and the organizations of our friends” to accomplish it. This document was recognized as authentic by the U.S. Department of Justice as was introduced as evidence in the Holy Land terror financing trial.

In 1993, the FBI wiretapped a secret meeting of top Brotherhood operatives in Philadelphia. A key theme was deception and secrecy in support of their non-violent activism. In the words of one participant, the objective was “forming the public opinion or coming up with a policy to influence…the way the Americans deal with the Islamists, for instance.”

The Brotherhood decided that a new front with an apparently clean track record was necessary. Two of the participants in that meeting founded the Council on American-Islamic Relations the following year. By 1994, the infrastructure of the Brotherhood lobby was in place, though it would continue to expand with new organizations and name changes.

The Influence Peddlers

The most senior elements of the Brotherhood lobby handled outreach to the Clinton Administration and both political parties, especially the presidential campaign of then-Texas Governor George W. Bush.

SamiSami al-Arian was a central figure. He admits having been a Muslim Brotherhood member from 1978 to 1982, but his involvement in the American lobby continued after that. In a 1992 letter, al-Arianacknowledged that his organization and IIIT, the aforementioned Brotherhood front, were essentially one and the same. He was convicted in 2006 of the charge of conspiring to provide services to the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), a specially designated terrorist organization.

Another central figure was Abdurrahman Alamoudi and his American Muslim Council. He developed intimidate ties to both political parties, despite his support of terrorist groups. In 2004, he was indicted on terrorism-related charges. He later wrote from his prison cell, “I am, I hope, still a member of the Muslim Brotherhood organization in the U.S.A,” as reported by the Grand Deception documentary.

In 2000, Alamoudi was asked by an Islamic website how Muslims should “decrease the influence of the Zionist lobby on presidential candidates.” He said they must elect sympathetic candidates like Rep. Tom Campbell (R-CA).

Rep. Campbell spoke at the Brotherhood lobby’s events and touted their causes. He became the example and was rewarded with political support and donations to his Senate campaign in 2000, including a fundraiser that brought in $35,000. The man guiding Campbell was Suhail Khan, his campaign coordinator in 1995 and press secretary and legislative assistant from 1996 to 1999.

Read more

Ryan Mauro is the ClarionProject.org’s National Security Analyst, a fellow with the Clarion Project and is frequently interviewed on top-tier TV stations as an expert on counterterrorism and Islamic extremism.

safe_image

click the image to sign the petition

Influence Operation

Frank Gaffney / AP

Frank Gaffney / AP

Washington Free Beacon, by :

Islamists linked to the Muslim Brotherhood are seeking to influence the U.S. conservative movement as part of non-violent jihad against the United States, according to a group of retired national security leaders.

The 10 former officials—including a retired attorney general, former CIA director, a retired general and an admiral, and a former counterterrorism prosecutor—challenged an assessment made several years ago of the political outreach activities by anti-tax activist Grover Norquist and Suhail Khan, a former George W. Bush administration official, and their purported links to Islamist subversive groups.

The 2011 assessment in question was conducted for the American Conservative Union (ACU) by Cleta Mitchell, a lawyer and ACU board member who concluded there was no factual basis for charges linking the two activists to Islamists.

In a cover letter accompanying a 45-page dossier made public Tuesday, the former officials supported charges made by Frank Gaffney, a former Reagan administration defense official, who has said both activists are tied to and have engaged in activities “in support of Islamists inside the United States, including the Muslim Brotherhood, its operatives, front groups, and agendas.”

The letter and “statement of facts” were produced in response to Mitchell’s review for the ACU that stated she found “no factual basis” to Gaffney’s charges. The rebuttal letter and dossier also was sent to ACU Chairman Alberto R. Cardenas.

The dossier, titled “The Islamists’—and their Enablers’—Assault on the Right: The case against Grover Norquist and Suhail Khan,” presents a detailed rebuttal of the Mitchell memorandum.

“The statement of facts demonstrates that Suhail Khan and Grover Norquist have extensive ties to ‘various Muslim extremist organizations,’ individuals associated with them and their activities,” the report said.

“These include: organizations established in federal court as prominent Muslim Brotherhood front organizations with ties to the designated terrorist organization, Hamas; two convicted terrorists, Abdurahman Alamoudi and Sami al-Arian; and efforts to deny prosecutors an important counterterrorism tool vilified by such groups and individuals as ‘secret evidence,’” the report said.

The former officials stated in the cover letter that Mitchell should address the compiled statement of facts that they asserted support Gaffney’s charges and contradict her 2011 assessment.

Additionally, the former officials said the Mitchell memorandum prompted the ACU board to endorse the conduct of two of its members that “is at odds with the stated mission of the American Conservative Union—namely, ‘harnessing the collective strength of conservative organizations fighting for Americans who are concerned with liberty, personal responsibility, traditional values, and strong national defense.’”

Mitchell said in an email she had no plan to read the report and thus would have no comment.

A spokeswoman for Norquist had no immediate comment, and a spokesman did not return an email seeking comment. Khan could not be reached for comment and did not return emails seeking comment.

The dossier concludes that Muslim Brotherhood front groups are engaged in “civilization jihad” aimed at destroying Western civilization from within. It also says “Muslim Brotherhood front groups and operatives have targeted, among others, the Republican Party and conservative movement.”

The cover letter was signed by former Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey; former CIA Director R. James Woolsey; former Rep. Allen B. West; retired Army Lt. Gen. William G. Boykin, a former undersecretary of defense for intelligence; former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy; Former FBI Agent John Guandolo; retired Adm. James A. Lyons, former commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet; former Pentagon Inspector General Joseph E. Schmitz; Amb. Henry F. Cooper, former director of the Pentagon’s Strategic Defense Initiative Organization; and former CIA officer Clare Lopez.

Cannon Shot

UT-Knoxville’s Newest Student Anti-Israel Hate Group

sjp“When people criticize Zionists, they mean Jews. You are talking anti-Semitism.”

– Martin Luther King, Jr., Harvard University 1968.

By :

In 2013, Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) announced its status as an official student organization at UT-Knoxville.  With about 100 chapters at last count, SJP organizes extreme hate-filled anti-Israel activity on college campuses around the country, including:

  • Israel Apartheid Week – typically held between February – March and involves:
    • Staging mock checkpoints where they stop students and yell “Are you Jewish?”
    • Erecting “Apartheid Walls” with “Hamas posters describing Jews as baby-killers and maps showing the Jewish state erased and replaced with ‘Palestine.’”
  • Posting eviction notices on dorm room doors to simulate housing demolition in Israel.
  • BDS resolutions (boycott, divestment and sanctions against the State of Israel), calling for economic warfare agains the Jewish state. (The first divestment campaign was launched at UC Berkley on Holocaust Remembrance Day.)
  • Hosting extremist/radical anti-Israel speakers who support terrorism against the State of Israel.
  • Protesting pro-Israel groups, events and speakers. (SJP members at University of California, Irvine heckled Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren throughout his speech until they were removed by campus security.)
  • Disrupting campus Holocaust memorial events and even worse, their perversion of the famous Holocaust quote “never again.”

Reports about vandalism of campus Jewish facilities, harassment of Jewish professors and students and even physical attacks by members of SJP have been reported at some schools.

If this is what SJP is reported to do, is this what UT-Knoxville can expect?

UT-Knoxville SJP’s Faculty Sponsor is Dr. Brian K. Barber, a 1996-97 grant recipient from the Center for Policy Analysis on Palestine (CPAP), renamed the Palestine Center, which is the educational arm of the Jerusalem Fund.

The chairman of the Jerusalem Fund is Samar Ali’s father, Subhi Ali.  The Jerusalem Fund’s Executive Director openly advocates BDS (boycott, divestment and sanctions) against the State of Israel. (See, “Samar Ali: Her Father’s Organization Wants to Destroy Israel.”)

About SJP

Like Jerusalem Fund founder Hisham Sharabi and community organizations that support “radical Palestinian terror groups,” SJP gives voice to student members who refuse to condemn terrorism.

SJP was founded in 2001 by co-founders Hatem Bazian, the Islamist, and Snehal Shingavi, the socialist — a “leftist-Islamist” alliance (also referred to as a “red-green” alliance).  This joinder has allowed the SJP to appeal to a broader coalition, which includes left-wing activists and religio-cultural political groups like the Muslim Students Association.

Hatem Bazian Brought His Middle East Hate to School

  • Virulently anti-Semitic Jew-hater who came as a college student to the U.S. from the Hamas stronghold of Nablus in the West Bank.
  • Served as President of the General Union of Palestinian Students, the student arm of the PLO and an organization that was banned in Germany after the Munich Olympics massacre.
  • Served as Muslim Students Association (MSA) president at Berkley
  • Was a fundraising speaker for Kindhearts, a Hamas front closed by the US government after being considered for designation as a terrorist organization
  • Co-founded Zaytuna College with Zaid Shakir, a repeat visitor to Nashville who tells his college audiences that, “under Islamic law the kafir won’t be equal with the Muslim.  The Christian or the Jew will be a dhimmi.  They won’t be equal with the Muslim.”  He was quoted in the New York Times as saying that “he still hoped that one day the United States would be a Muslim country ruled by Islamic law.”
  • Founded and chairs the national extremist anti-Israel organization American Muslims for Palestine (AMP) which helps train and support SJP activists.  SJP’s 2002 national convention was sponsored by the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), with guest speaker Sami al-Arian.

The IAP was created by a Hamas leader to be its U.S. propaganda arm and raise money for Hamas. IAP was listed as one of the Muslim Brotherhood’s likeminded organizations in the Muslim Brotherhood’s strategic plan for North America. IAP’s leadership founded CAIR – the Council on American Islamic Relations.

Sami al-Arian was the head of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) in the U.S. In 2006 when he was sentenced to 57 months in prison in connection with PIJ activities, the judge described him as a “master manipulator.” This past December, he was on Capitol Hill advocating for the restoration of Morsi’s ousted Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

Al-Arian also founded WISE (World and Islam Studies Enterprise).  Hisham Sharabi, founder of the Jerusalem Fund, was a WISE Board member. Subhi Ali, Samar’s father, served alongside Sharabi until taking over as Chairman of the Jerusalem Fund.  WISE was named in a federal indictment as part of a “criminal organization whose members and associates engaged in acts of violence including murder, extortion, money laundering, fraud and issue of visas, and operated worldwide,” including in Florida.

Read more at Front Page

Also see: Discover The Networks profile on Hatem Bazian

 

In the spirit of interfaith dialogue and “building bridges” perhaps Bazian should entertain Andrew Klavan’s proposal:

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

 

 

After 3-Year Freeze, Government Seeks “Prompt Resolution” of Al-Arian Case

The Muslim Brotherhood’s winter offensive

3831235057Center for Security Policy, By Frank Gaffney:

Sixty-nine years ago this month, Nazi Germany mounted its last, horrific offensive in the dead of winter in what came to be known as the Battle of the Bulge.  Perhaps taking a page from the playbook of their fellow totalitarians, the Muslim Brotherhood seems to have its own audacious winter offensive underway – only this one is being waged inside America, a country the Brothers have declared they seek “to destroy from within.”

At the moment, the object of this exercise appears to be to prevail on the U.S. government to do what it did once before: help install a Muslim Brotherhood regime in Egypt.  The difference, of course, is that the last time was in the heyday of the so-called “Arab Spring,” a moment when the ambitions of Egyptian Islamists and those of their counterparts in Tunisia, Libya, Syria and elsewhere were temporarily obscured by disinformation and wishful thinking.

In short order, however, the determination of the Muslim Brotherhood and its ilk to impose the supremacist and brutally repressive doctrine they call shariah became evident in Cairo and the rest of the Middle East.  Whether they gained power via violent revolution or through the ballot box, the goal was the same: compel moderate Muslims, secularists, Christians and everybody else to submit to orthodox Islamic misrule. Resistance was met with violence, imprisonment and the destruction of churches.

Fortunately, as many as thirty million Egyptians took to the streets of their cities last summer to denounce the Brotherhood and demand the removal from power of its president, Mohamed Morsi.  He was overthrown and arrested in July by the military-led opposition, his organization banned and its other leaders incarcerated.  Most sentient Americans recognized this as a very positive development.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s operatives, front organizations and allies in this country have nonetheless demanded Morsi’s restoration. They present themselves as champions of democracy, hoping no one will notice the practical effect of the Brothers’ policies when in power: a state in which elections amount to nothing more than one man, one vote, one time.

The Brotherhood’s advocates enjoy considerable access to and influence with the Obama administration.  For example, the President and his subordinates take counsel from Homeland Security Department advisors like Mohamed Magid, the president of this country’s largest Muslim Brotherhood front, the Islamic Society of North America, and Mohamed Elibiary, an Islamist community organizer based in Plano, Texas. At the urging of their ilk, Mr. Obama cut off military sales to the Egyptian government a few months ago.  In addition to needlessly alienating Cairo when it is rolling up our mutual enemies, he thus created an opportunity for Vladimir Putin to pick up the slack and, in the process, further reestablish Russia in the Middle East.

The Muslim Brotherhood in this country (the subject of a free ten-part online course at www.MuslimBrotherhoodinAmerica.com) is evidently determined to do even more for their fellow jihadists in Egypt.  Hence, they have created new fronts to promote Egyptian “democracy” and held lobbying and fundraising events in several U.S. cities featuring top Brotherhood personalities.

As the indispensable Investigative Project on Terrorism first reported, one of those is Tariq Ramadan, the grandson of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hassan al-Banna.  Ramadan was allowed into the United States in January 2010 at the direction of then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, whose longtime aide, Huma Abedin, also has extensive personal and family ties to the Brotherhood.

Even more outrageous is the presence at several of these events – including one in the House Cannon Office Building on December 5th – of Sami Al-Arian. Al-Arian would seem an unlikely choice to sell Congress on so dubious a proposition as restoring the Muslim Brotherhood to power in Egypt.  After all, he not only engaged in what the Brotherhood calls “civilization jihad” in the United States. That’s the stealthy subversion Islamists employ until they are able to use violence to foist shariah worldwide.

Sami al-Arian was also convicted in 2006 of aiding Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), a designated terrorist group he led for many years.  PIJ has been responsible for murders of innocents in the past and applauded a bus bombing in Israel just last Sunday.  Why on earth would Judge Leonie Brinkema allow Al-Arian, who is awaiting disposition of contempt of court charges and faces possible deportation, to collaborate and agitate with his fellow Muslim Brothers, albeit with a location-monitoring bracelet?

It is obscene that anyone in Congress would host such a jihadist. Rep. Andre Carson (D-IN), a Muslim legislator who sponsored the event at which Al-Arian appeared, claims not to have known that he would be there.  True or not, he and President Obama have certainly failed to recognize the Muslim Brotherhood for the enemy it is.

That failure makes all the more dangerous the Muslim Brotherhood’s present offensive.  As we mark the anniversary of the bloody and avoidable Battle of the Bulge, we would do well to reflect upon an event held last month at the Brotherhood beachhead at Georgetown University, the Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding.  Among those invited to promote a “return to democracy” in Egypt was a featured guest speaker named Rami Jan, who happens to be a member of the Egyptian Nazi party.

NGO Leader’s Terror Designation Looks Familiar

Convicted Terror Supporter Attends Congressional Briefing

Sami al-ArianBy :

A convicted terrorist supporter who is currently under house arrest attended a Capitol Hill briefing hosted by a pro-Muslim Brotherhood group in a congressional office building earlier this month, according to reports.

Sami Al-Arian, a former engineering professor at the University of South Florida, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to aid the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) in 2006. He has been under house detention in Northern Virginia since 2008 for refusing to testify in a subsequent terror financing trial.

Al-Arian admitted in the plea agreement to having worked with the PIJ and other groups from the 1980s to the 1990s. He said he helped assist the PIJ after it was officially designated as a terrorist organization in 1995.

Al-Arian showed up at the briefing at the Cannon House Office Building in Washington, D.C., on Nov. 5, the Investigative Project on Terrorism reported. A group called the Egypt Freedom Foundation hosted the event.

The Egypt Freedom Foundation recently helped organize an event at Georgetown University that featured a member of Egypt’s Nazi Party, Ramy Jan, the Free Beacon reported last month.

Al-Arian’s house detention was modified last January, according to a court order, allowing him to leave his home during non-curfew hours with a monitoring device.

Briefing rooms in the Cannon House Office Building are available for public events, but a member of Congress must reserve them.

A spokesperson for Rep. Andre Carson (D., Ind.) confirmed to the Free Beacon that his office reserved the room where the event was held, but said Carson was not aware of Al-Arian’s appearance.

“He didn’t really know anything about the room being booked, or who was going to show up at this thing,” said spokesperson Lauren Burke. “He wasn’t there, nor was any staff there. We didn’t know that this person was going to show up.”

The Department of Justice declined to provide a comment.

An attorney for Al-Arian and his advocacy group did not respond to request for comment.

The Center for Security Policy’s David Reaboi contrasted the incident to terror cleric Anwar al-Awlaki’s now-infamous Capitol Hill prayer sessions prior to his becoming al Qaeda’s top spokesman.

“When Anwar al-Awlaki led prayers at the Capitol, he wasn’t yet known to be a terrorist. Sami Al-Arian, on the other hand, has been convicted for his role in directing and funding Palestinian Islamic Jihad,” Reaboi said.

“In a time when Homeland Security advisers like Mohamed Elibiary praise the Muslim Brotherhood daily on Twitter, a convicted terrorist like Al-Arian visiting Capitol Hill seems almost positively quaint. But it should still be an outrage.”

Read more at Free Beacon

Chilling Effect for Me, But Not for Thee

yhFront Page, by :

“I don’t apply the same standards” as in the United States, the Muslim Harvard Law School professor Intisar A. Rabb stated at a November 21, 2013, Georgetown University conference with respect to “hate speech” restrictions and Islam abroad.  In connection with her concern about an American Muslim’s terrorism conviction “chilling speech,” Rabb’s acceptance of “just a different legal regime” abroad revealed troubling double standards towards Islam.

Raab addressed the final panel of “Muslim-Christian Relations in the 21st Century:  Challenges & Opportunities,” a controversial conference (see herehere, and here) marking the 20th anniversary of Georgetown’s Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding (ACMCU).  Rabb opposed a recent appeals court conviction affirmation for Tarek Mehanna, as elaborated in an amici curia brief in Mehanna’s appeal.  Therein Rabb and others warned of a “serious chilling effect” on speech from convicting Mehanna for translating the book 39 Ways to Serve and Participate in Jihad for the website at-Tibyan.

The federal government considered the book, website, and Mehanna’s “disfavored political and religious beliefs” all supportive of Al Qaeda.  The appellate opinion noted that Mehanna had a First Amendment right to praise Al Qaeda, but Al-Qaeda-coordinated advocacy was terrorism support.  “Under the Government’s theory,” amici curia warned, “translating an al-Qa’ida text is lawful, as is espousing beliefs…supporting al-Qa’ida,” but together these “legal acts gives rise to criminal liability,” a particular concern for scholars researching terrorism.

Rabb at Georgetown therefore demanded that action beyond speech underlie any terrorism support conviction.  Yet, unmentioned by Rabb, Mehanna had traveled in 2004 to Yemen, irrespective of any translation work charge.  The appeals court rejected his “rose-colored glasses” presentation as a “devoted scholar…protected by the First Amendment” and found a jury conclusion “virtually unarguable” that Mehanna “went abroad to enlist in…terrorist training.”

Legal issues aside, amici curiae did not consider Mehanna’s reading and website choices objectionable.   At-Tibyan, for example, “primarily” concerned “Abu Muhammad al-Maqdisi…a theologian and a jurist” who “endorses rebellion against…illegitimate Muslim regimes.”  Among “innumerable mainstream theological texts,”39 Ways also involved “basic…Sunni jurisprudence,” namely the “individual duty (fard ‘ayn) incumbent on all Muslims” to “contribute to wars of self-defense.”  “All collections of the words and deeds of the Muslim Prophet Muhammad (hadith) and all Islamic law books” endorsed this “standard position in all Sunni legal schools.”

The amici curiae cited a 2003 fatwa from “mainstream Muftis” at OnIslam, “[o]ne of the most popular websites in the English-speaking world devoted to Islam.”  The muftis considered whether for Muslims it is “necessary to fight alongside Afghans” or otherwise resist American-led forces in Afghanistan.  Citing Quran verses legitimating fighting against non-Muslims, the muftis answered that the “Muslim Ummah (nation) is considered one body, which if a single organ aches all the other organs will share the feelings of agony.”

Robert Spencer of the website Jihadwatch could not have explained such doctrines of jihad in a more troubling manner.  Questions in the brief about targeting civilians aside, the cited Islamic doctrine justified the killing of military personnel “attacking” Muslim nations, cold comfort to, among others, beheaded British soldier Lee Rigby or the 13 Americans of the Fort Hood shooting.  Rabb’s brief could only confirm the criticisms of Islam by individuals like Spencer or Holland’s Geert Wilders and incite Terry Jones to burn another Quran.

Unlike Rabb, though, Spencer has faced exclusion from the United Kingdom and Wilders criminal prosecution in Holland for their comments on Islam, while destroying a Quran is prohibited hate speech in countries like Belgium.  Such domestic legal actions accord with the longstanding international agenda of majority-Muslim nations in the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to prohibit criticizing Islam.  This agenda has culminated in the March 24, 2011,United Nations Human Rights Council Resolution 16/18 with troubling implications for free speech even after Western-induced modifications.

In this context, Rabb’s invocation of the proverbial “chilling effect” on free speech prompted my question about criticizing Islam.  Rabb’s “each regime is different” response allowed for “dignity laws” as a “prerogative” for other democracies dealing with anti-Islam speech grouped by her with Nazism.  Muslim-majority countries also had such laws, Rabb indicated, a worrying statement in light of Islamic blasphemy laws.

Critical issues involving Islam, however, were not absent from the conference.  George Soros-financed leftist evangelical Richard Cizek, for example, recalled during a panel how a fellow evangelical had once told him that “insults in Lynchburg produce riots in Lahore.”  Convicted terrorism financier Sami Al-Arian, meanwhile, discussed with me in the audience viewing the conference’s morning segment before going home to comply with his house arrest.

“Islamophobia” critic Nathan Lean was also in the audience.  Called a “stalker” by Spencer, Lean has repeatedly tweeted an article supposedly containing Spencer’s address and wife’s picture, a “clear attempt to intimidate me.”  Addressed by me on this matter, Lean curtly replied that it is “not appropriate” to discuss Spencer at a Christian-Muslim understanding conference and walked away.

Thus Lean, Rabb, and others, concerned about fundamentally necessary anti-terrorism laws infringing intellectual inquiry in the United States, exhibited little principled concern about uninhibited discussion of Islam.  Yet as the conference and Mehanna’s conviction show, the needs of security and liberty demand robust debate precisely with respect to Islam.

This article was sponsored by The Legal Project, an activity of the Middle East Forum.

Al-Arian Resurfaces in New American Brotherhood Campaign

The Brotherhood on Campus: Your Tax Dollars at Work

va-shenandoah-450x337Front Page, By :

The National Endowment for the Humanities says it “strengthens our republic by promoting excellence in the humanities.” Apparently, the federal agency believes that funding student outreach by the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity, fits this description.

On October 24, IIIT held an outreach event at Shenandoah University in Winchester, VA with the school’s Muslim Students Association, another group founded by the Muslim Brotherhood.

The IIIT summary states that the program “is offered in cooperation with the National Endowment for the Humanities” and the event is supported by Student Life’s Intercultural Programs, the College of Arts and Sciences and the Alson H. Smith Jr. Library.

The FBI had informants inside the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood network that warned about IIIT’s plan to “institute the Islamic Revolution in the United States” as far back as 1988. A declassified FBI document shows that a spy recalled the leadership “stated that the Muslims in the United States have to be prepared for martyrdom.”

The spy said that IIIT was currently focused on “peacefully get[ting] inside the United States government and also American universities.” Therefore, in this case, IIIT is using a taxpayer-funded federal agency to pursue the objective it has pursued for decades.

1991 U.S. Muslim Brotherhood memo, later seized by the authorities, substantiated the FBI informant’s reporting. The secret document listed IIIT as one of the Brotherhood’s secret fronts as part of its “work in America as a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within.”

Skeptics will point out that 1988 and 1991 were a long time ago, but 2002 isn’t. That’s the year when IIIT’s offices were raided as part of a terrorism-financing investigation. The probe continued until at least 2007 when the U.S. government was pressuring Sami al-Arian, a convicted terrorist, to testify about his strong links to IIIT.

In 1992, the President of IIIT wrote a letter to Sami al-Arian that said, “For us, we deem all of your institutions our own…” The letter discussed IIIT’s financial support of al-Arian’s group.

As recently as 2011, an IIIT official in London was writing articles characterizing the U.S. government and military as terrorists. He accused the U.S. of “killing literally millions of people and setting a dozen of countries on fire” since 2001. That IIIT official, Dr. Jasser Auda, also has links to Sheikh Yousef al-Qaradawi, the terrorism-supporting spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood.

The IIIT website proudly hosts a photo of two of its leaders meeting with then-President Morsi on September 27, 2012 in New York. At that time, Morsi was moving the Brotherhood’s Sharia agenda in Egypt full speed ahead. And, according to the caption beneath the photo, he “welcomed the participation of IIIT in the rerform [sic] of higher education in Egypt.”

To sum it up: The same organization that the Muslim Brotherhood wanted to “reform” education in Egypt is now educating American students with the help of a taxpayer-supported federal agency.

Despite IIIT’s record, it has relationships with American schools around the country. Politicians and professors attend IIIT Iftar dinners and some teachers took part in a recent IIIT summer education program for selected students. One even teaches at the U.S. Naval Academy.

Shenandoah University is just a case study in what IIIT is accomplishing. Dr. Calvin Allen, Dean of its College of Arts and Sciences, signed a Memorandum of Agreement with IIIT so the Brotherhood front could “designate an instructor to co-teach with Dr. Allen a course on Islamic civilization.”

Allen signed the agreement with Jamal Barzinji, IIIT’s Vice President and one of the founding fathers of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood network. In 2003, the authorities searched Barzinji’s residence because he “is not only closely associated with PIJ [Palestinian Islamic Jihad]…but also with Hamas.” Allen also spoke at a IIIT fundraiser on August 24, 2011.

IIIT is just one Islamist group that is building relationships with academia. The Alavi Foundation in New York is a front for the Iranian regime and it has donated to 30 schools in the U.S. and Canada. In addition, it financed over 60 Islamic sites in America and many other non-profit organizations. The Blaze is the only television program to cover the Alavi Foundation’s donations (watch my segment here).

Readers are encouraged to send this article and the Clarion Project’s full profile of IIIT to Shenandoah University. The listed contact for the event is Dean Cal Allen (callen@su.edu). The school can also be contacted at shenuniv@su.edu and 540-665-4500.

The National Endowment for the Humanities can be contacted at info@neh.gov and 202-606-8400. You can also write the agency at 1100 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Washington, D.C., 20506.

Every cent given to a Muslim Brotherhood-linked organization is a cent wasted. American taxpayers need to make their voices heard.

 

Early school dismissal for Florida Muslim students – religious entitlement or con job?

Released for jummah prayers on Fridays

Released for jummah prayers on Fridays

By Randy McDaniels and Jerry Gordon:

The Islamic Society of Tampa Bay (ISTABA) issued a press release last week urging parents to fill out their “Religious Observance Early Dismissal Request Form” and press their respective schools for special and indefinite religious accommodations for Muslims Studentsenabling them to attend the “Mandatory” Friday Islamic sermon and prayers every week from 12:30 PM until 3:00 PM.  A request which would essentially deprive Muslim students at least a half day of required teaching each week on a permanent basis.

The Dismissal Request Form was in all actuality a demand rather than a request.  The Islamic Society of Tampa cited Florida Statue(s) 1006.53, 1002.20 (2c)(c), and 1003.21 (2)(b), stating these dismissal were a matter of Florida Law, while failing to cite all of the language, ISTABA conspicuously omitted sections of the statutes which state Boards must adopt a policy which REASONABLY accommodate Religious Observances.

The Islamic Society went on to state, “According to Islamic teachings, it is an obligation to observe this prayer otherwise it is a sin”

The Friday Jumu’ah prayer is not the only mandatory [fard] Islamic prayer. The fact is there are five daily prayers which are mandatory for Muslims, to include the noon (Zuhr) prayer, which in the context Mahmoud Elkasaby of the Islamic Society of Tampa Bay has laid out; would also require special religious accommodations for Muslim students not on a weekly but daily basis.

However, according to Islamic teachings ALL missed prayers can be made up at a later time and would therefore not constitute a sin, as the School Board and community are lead to believe.

In fact, the Reliance of the  Traveller: a Classical Manual of Islamic Sacred Law, which bears the approval the most prestigious Islamic institutions and groups in the Middle East and North America devotes a whole book to this subject of prayer(Book F:  The Prayer (SALAT)) and several sections go into detail on how to perform makeup prayers.

The following Q & A was found on the website Islam.about.com:

Question: Can missed prayers be performed at a later time?

Answer: The schedule of Muslim prayer is one that is generous and flexible. Yet many of us miss prayers during the day — sometimes for unavoidable reasons, sometimes due to negligence.  If a prayer is missed…it is to be made up as soon as one is able to do so. This is known as Qadaa’. For example, if one misses the noon prayer because of a work meeting that could not be interrupted, one should pray as soon as the meeting is over. If the next prayer time has already come, one should first perform the prayer that was missed, and immediately after it the “on time” prayer.

Religious freedom is a cornerstone of American culture and heritage, and although our Constitutional Republic, as well as our legal system is founded on Judeo/Christian principles; these same values are responsible for the establishment of laws to ensure religious observance of all faiths are protected and reasonably accommodated.

The Question before the School Board, the Tampa community, and the State of Florida for that matter should be whether or not this request passes the litmus test of REASONABLE accommodation of religious observances.  It is important to note that Muslims have thrived in America society for several decades and the issue of these observances is only just surfacing?

Upon reflecting on dubious association of ISTABA with Ahmed Bedier, affiliations with the Islamic Center of Pinellas Park – the former Mosque of convicted terrorist Sami Al-Arian, glaring omissions regarding Florida Statutes on religious observances, as well as the misleading  requirements in regard to Islamic prayers, it seems more likely political maneuvering by  Mahmoud Elkasaby and ISTABA via another Islamic teaching – a type of holy deception or permissibly lying.  Kitman is the Islamic Doctrine of lying by omission, in this case to obtain SPECIAL or Preferential treatment rather than reasonable accommodations as a show of Islamic superiority.

This type of deception is not restricted educational institutions, in fact , another Trojan Horse being used to insinuate Sharia in America over the past decade is Sharia Compliant Finance (SCF).  SCF was introduce to the western financial sector Sharia adherent Islamist are selling the west the concept of paying or receiving interest (Riba) is a sin.

Read more at Watchdog Wire

Randy McDaniels is a former United States Marine who occupational specialty was in Operation and later Counter Intelligence. Served 6 years before being honoraby discharged. A Chapter Leader for ACT! for America and Mentor for the South East.

Oath of Deception?

imagesCA9XA4JYby IPT News:

Belief in radical Islamic ideology could be grounds to deport immigrants, even after they’ve naturalized, a provocative report from the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) says.

The report, National Security Threats Should Be Denaturalized, comes from “a retired government employee with many years of experience in immigration administration, law enforcement, and national security matters” who writes under a pseudonym.

People already can be blocked from naturalization for affiliating with totalitarian groups, or engaging in or advocating violence to overthrow the U.S. government. The report argues that the totalitarian prohibition can apply to adherents of radical Islam.

“Why totalitarianism? Because under radical strains of Islam, such as Salafism, it is impossible to reconcile separation of church and state,” the report says. “All civil authority bows to the wisdom of religious clerics in a theocracy. The best existing example (if one can use that descriptor loosely) of such a theocracy in action is the Islamic Republic of Iran. The worst example in recent memory is the Taliban when it ruled Afghanistan. Can one doubt that both examples point clearly to a totalitarian form of government in which no form of peaceful dissension or religious liberty is tolerated? In fact, dissension and religious differences are dealt with brutally.”

Under the proposal, someone could be barred from becoming a citizen if he or she is a follower of radical Islam to the extent that Islam and sharia law should supersede secular law and liberty in the United States. And citizenship can be stripped if it later is determined the person failed to disclose those beliefs.

The report describes the two existing provisions for denaturalizing citizens under such circumstances. But there has been little focus or interest among federal authorities to aggressively pursue such cases, even when the offenders have been convicted of serious national security crimes.

The CIS report identifies 51 cases since 2003 involving naturalized citizens who were charged with and/or convicted of national security related violations. Of them, 34 (66 percent) were from Islamic countries or otherwise identified as being involved in an Islamist security threat violation case.

Denaturalized people revert to their prior immigration status, usually a permanent resident alien. But resident aliens convicted of certain crimes, particularly national security crimes, are subject to deportation. Even absent a criminal conviction, permanent residents can be deported if they obtained that status through fraud or misrepresentation.

This CIS report raises noteworthy issues that have lingered for nearly a decade. And while federal authorities appear to be lethargic in the pursuit of even national security denaturalization cases, there have been some successes such as Fawaz Damra and Abdurahman M. Alamoudi. Even the notorious criminal case against Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) operative Sami Al-Arian began as a naturalization fraud investigation.

But a handful of victories in a sea of ignored cases is not really success. There is much room for improvement and, ironically, improvement may not even require legislative change but no more than shift in focus and willingness by executive branch agencies responsible for investigating and prosecuting the violations. This matter appears ripe for congressional inquiry. The CIS report has opened that door.

See also:

Frank Gaffney: Stop Shariah Immigration (counterjihadreport.cm)