Emerson on Fox News America’s Newsroom – Open Societies and Stopping Terrorism

 

Bill Hemmer: Police in Canada now say the gunman in the attack acted alone. Serious questions that remain about whether or not this was yet another instance of a so-called lone wolf attack. Steve Emerson, executive director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism, with me now. Steve, how are you? And good morning to you. You have some sources up on Ottawa. What are you picking up now that we have not yet learned?

Steve Emerson: Canada is no different than the United States. For the last few years, last decade or so, they have experienced at least a dozen major aborted plots to attack major targets [in Canada] including government facilities as well as [other] facilities in [Canada and] the United States. All of them have been stopped with the assistance of either Canadian intelligence or US intelligence. The sound bite you played by Walid Phares was right on, was spot on. The issue is if the government can get inside our minds then they could stop acts of terrorism. But the issue is the point of activization. You can be radical but not cross the line; you are believing in a radical theology. Once you cross that line into carrying out a criminal predicate, then it’s illegal, then the government has the right to stop you. So taking away your passport isn’t going to stop you from carrying out an act of violence.

Hemmer: Yeah you’re precisely right about that. Just so our viewers know, this man’s passport was confiscated. So too are the passports of 90 other suspected Islamic radicals that the Canadians are watching right now. You mentioned Walid Phares. To our viewers who did not hear that, here’s what he said on the record last night.

Clip of Walid Phares: The pool of individuals who are like Rouleau and Bibeau, both in the United States and in Canada, is pretty big. How are we going to be able to determine which one is going to act is the real problem of counterintelligence services.

Hemmer: How we are able to determine which one will act is the real problem of counterintelligence. How do you address that Steve?

Emerson: That is the quintessential problem because when the government becomes too intrusive, when it starts listening to conversations, taking down your phone numbers, looking at the books that you read at the library, the public gets outraged, that’s invading your privacy. Yet those are all indicators, potential indicators of whether you are potentially going to carry out an act of terrorism or whether you’re interested in carrying out an act of terrorism. And yet the problem is that if you are not interested and yet the government does intrude on your privacy, everyone yells, well this is an invasion of your civil liberties. In a free society there’s always going to be this tension here. After 9/11 there was no controversy at all about passing the Patriot Act. I think it passed 99-1. Today if you had a vote in the Congress about the Patriot Act, I’m not so sure it would pass. Maybe it would pass today, but maybe it wouldn’t have passed last week.

Hemmer: It just has a way of rubbing off and the intensity we give the topic rubs off after time. We were speaking last hour with a great guest who was telling us that you need to raise the terror alert just to make sure the thing still work. They did this in Canada, I don’t know if that is something you would support here. Is that even necessary in our country?

Emerson: Well you remember we went through the color alerts. The issue of the alerts is a psychological thing; the purpose is to raise the public awareness. But the reality is, Bill, that the public awareness is raised really only through one thing – through fear. And that fear is engendered ironically through the success of attacks like the ones that were carried out in Canada over the last three days. When the FBI is successful in stopping attacks, the public doesn’t realize the magnitude of damage and death that could occur. So they’re almost victims of their own success. That’s the real irony in stopping attacks.

Hemmer: Steve, it is good to get your analysis here. Thanks for coming back with us today. Steve Emerson out of Washington, DC.

****

See videos with transcripts of all of Steve Emerson’s appearances here.

Emerson with Judge Jeanine: The Jihadists in Oklahoma and the Obama Administration’s Blinders on Islamic Extremism

 

by Steven Emerson
Interview on Fox News
September 28, 2014

Judge Jeanine Pirro: And with me now the founder of the Investigative Project, Steve Emerson. All right Steve, welcome. A great night for you to be on. Alton Nolen’s Facebook page. You’ve seen it. What does it tell you about him and what his intentions are?

Steve Emerson: His Facebook page is replete with statements, pictures that emphatically reveal his allegiance to radical Islam, his hatred of the United States, his support of 9/11 attacks, his support of killing Americans, his support of Osama bin Laden. It’s a road map to his affiliation and his support to radical Islam. It’s proof of the fact that he’s a jihadist.

Judge Jeanine: So when you say that he has the markings of a jihadist, tell us why.

Emerson: Let me add a couple of other things here. Not only does the Facebook page prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt [that he was a jihadist], but the fact that his computers that were seized by law enforcement show that the websites he visited also revealed that he was looking at radical websites that were radical Islamic websites going for the killing of Americans. He was converted in jail to be a radical Muslim. The first step that is done by jihadists to prove, after when they start converting people, which he was doing, after he was released from jail, to prove that they can carry out acts of terrorism. So I’m looking at a scenario here, we don’t know, let me say Jeanine, what actually prompted him to pop. He was fired from his job. We don’t know that he was carrying out this beheading as a jihadist or that he was carrying it out because he was fired. But he carried it out as a jihadist in a jihadist manner, a decapitation which is an Islamic way.

But this guy was a ticking time bomb and I’m positive in saying this. That if he didn’t carry out this attack now at this point he would have done it in the future. And there are tens of thousands of others like him lurking outside, in the United States who haven’t done this but are jihadists and are just waiting to do it. And that’s the problem. Because as you know as a judge, you need a criminal predicate in order to charge somebody. Just because they express their support for jihad and willingness to kill, you can’t charge them, you can’t open up an investigation.

Judge Jeanine: Of course not, but Steve let me say that it is the intent, it’s the circumstances surrounding the crime both before and after that give us some sense of what the individual was thinking. And I think for the American people they’re wondering if this is a carrying out of a jihadi, a lone wolf carrying out his own jihad or if this is something bigger than that. But make no mistake Steve, this guy is imprisoned and actually tried to escape from detention and did escape. He was charged with assaulting an officer. He just got out of state prison. And we’re going to talk a little later in the show about the radicalization of some of our inmates to Islam based upon what they’re learning in prison. But with this case, how do we know whether or not his trying to recruit other people to join Islam is indicative f his being a jihadist?

Emerson: Well first of all there were profiles done [by the FBI and CIA] a couple years ago about Muslim inmates who are converted to Islam and what they actually do in prison and what they do after they get out of prison. The first thing they do out of prison in order to prove their loyalty to Islam is to actually try to convert people to Islam to prove that they are true Muslims. The second thing they do after they prove that is to do other steps [that prove they can be trusted to carry out terrorist acts]. I believe this [current situation] is going to lead to other people involved, [like] somebody who was running this guy frankly.

Number two, I believe that if we find out that he popped or that he carried out this killing because he was angry about being fired, [that] if he wasn’t fired he would have [ultimately] carried out…[sometime] else, a jihadist killing, because he was a radical jihadist that believed in killing Americans. And frankly Jeanine, there are tens of thousands of others like him in this country. I have no doubt that we are going to see other things like this, like are going on around the world. We are entering a global jihad. And the fact is this administration, the Attorney General, the White House, they have banned the use of the term ‘Islamic terrorism.’ He, [the] Attorney General who is retiring should be tried on obstruction of justice because I can tell you, [and] this is not publicly known, he has quashed the indictments of terrorist charges against known terrorist charities because he didn’t want to alienate Islamic communities in the US.

Judge Jeanine: I wish I had more time Steve to talk to you about that. Steve Emerson, thanks so much for being with us this evening.

Emerson: You’re welcome.

Obama Forbids FBI to Use Religion in Identifying Terror Threats, as ISIS Recruits Openly in U.S. Mosques

American Thinker, By Karin McQuillan:

Steven Emerson

Steven Emerson

AT had a chance to catch up with Steven Emerson, head of The Investigative Project on Terrorism, and hear his assessment of the ISIS threat here on American soil. Emerson runs the country’s top data center on Islamic terror groups in the United States, working like a man possessed, and accomplishing the work of thousands on sheer guts and determination to protect our country.

Wherever the bad guys have been caught and prosecuted successfully, you will find Emerson working quietly behind the scenes as an invaluable ally of the FBI and Homeland Security. Because he accepts no money from the government, Emerson has been free of the diktats of the Obama administration that have forbidden the FBI to train their sights on Muslim terrorists. (That means The Investigative Project needs your help to continue its work.)

In the words of U.S. Representative Pete Hoekstra, Ranking Member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence:

The Investigative Project on Terrorism is critical to our nation’s security. There is no other non-governmental group that has better intelligence or data on the threat to the United States and our allies. Making do with a bare bones budget, the IPT is a national treasure whose influence and achievements are unparalleled.

It is not an exaggeration to say that because of Democrat political correctness hamstringing our FBI agents, they could not combat the Islamists in our midst without Steven Emerson. Oliver “Buck” Revell, former head of FBI Investigations and Counter-Terrorism, said as much in these words: “The Investigative Project has been one of the most important sources of accurate and timely information on the real goals and objectives of the wide spread and powerful Islamist movement.”

The FBI turns to Emerson to find out what is happening. So does AT. This is what Emerson told us:

Isis is Al Qaeda 3.0. They are already in the United States and the only reason there has not been a terror attack is that they have not decided to do it yet.

The chief danger Steven Emerson sees is that there are three to four hundred ISIS killers in Syria and Iraq with American passports, who can return whenever they want, and the Obama administration is blocking the FBI from monitoring them in mosques. As Emerson told Judge Jeannine Pirro on Fox News:

The FBI has been handcuffed in terms of investigating religious extremists in mosques, as a result of guidelines put out by the attorney general earlier this year. And so therefore, there is… a definite problem now in investigating those militants in the United States who are either recruiting for ISIS or have returned from Syria or Iraq having fought for ISIS, and are ready to carry out freelance or directed terrorist attacks on behalf of ISIS against the United States…

the Department of Justice [which] put out guidelines that restricted the FBI and other law enforcement agencies from using religious factors in identifying threats, national security threats to the United States in the homeland.

…we’re seeing ISIS recruiting biophysicists, engineers, social media types, people who have expertise in really carrying out sophisticated terrorist attacks coming back to the United States.

there’s one recruiter that [had been]… picked up [in the past], well identified, in Bloomington, Minnesota at the Al Farooq Mosque. There are recruiters going around the country in other mosques, where they identify potential volunteers. They test them out to see if they’re willing to die on behalf of martyrdom of the cause for Allah. Then they give them cash, they provide money for their families in case they die. They give them tickets to go to Turkey. Turkey has allowed them, hundreds, to go through to Syria, then to Iraq. And we [the U.S.] count Turkey as one of our top allies. We haven’t put [many of] them on the terrorism watch list, which we should. So there’s a major disconnect, Judge, here between what we should be doing to protect the homeland and protect American citizens.

Question for our Congress: Obama will do nothing to revoke the passports of American ISIS maniacs. What are you doing about it?

 

Emerson on CNBC Discussing Terror Threats to West by Jihadi Veterans

 

IPT, by Steven Emerson
Interview on CNBC
September 18, 2014

Host Tyler Mathisen: Authorities in Australia staging the largest counterterrorism operation in the country’s history Thursday to disrupt a gruesome plan by Islamic militants living in the country to carry out random public executions or demonstration killings. Australian media reporting the suspects wanted to kidnap and behead a member of the public and drape the body in an ISIA flag. Australia just the latest example of radicalized Islamic militants waging terror from within on the home front. We’ve already seen murderous attacks in Belgium and England. Steve Emerson is an author and executive director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism and Ghaffar Hussain is a director at Quilliam, a counterterrorism think tank in London. Welcome to both of you. Mr. Hussein, let me begin with you. How close a call was this?

Ghaffar Hussain: From what I’m hearing, it was pretty close. The Australian police intercepted a phone call which suggested that these individuals, or one individual is a quite high-ranking member of ISIS, and he had been given instructions to now carry out this attack in response to, or as a tactical response from the ISIS point of view to the fact that the Australians are now sending troops to the region to help in the international effort to defeat isis. So I suppose we’re starting to see a number of things ISIS doing now, all of which are aimed to kind of prevent or the international coalition which has been a real game changer in holding back ISIS in Iraq.

Mathisen: Mr. Emerson, react to what Mr. Hussain just said, but also put in context the idea that the biggest terror threats may now come from within, not from without, and who are these people? Are they nationals of Australia or people who have gotten in via a passport? What?

Steve Emerson: Well after 9/11, the biggest threat was from al Qaeda [was] sending in operatives or trying to remotely detonate planes through operational devices that could remain undetected. Then we went through a period of homegrown terrorists who weren’t directed by al Qaeda but were recruited online or by the Muslim leaders in their own community. Now we’re into jihad 3.0 where we have people who are volunteering to battle Syria or the West in Iraq and in Syria, gaining the incredible experience of fighting, and then possibly returning back to their own countries in Europe, Australia or the United States. Now you have to remember that the people who are being recruited get vetted before they go to Turkey, which is the infiltration route. Then they get vetted at the border between Turkey and Syria to see who is willing to die and who is willing to be the most vicious. So when they return back to their home countries, you already have a preselected number of jihadis who are willing to die or carry out vicious acts of violence like beheadings. We haven’t experienced that in the US yet, but it certainly has been experienced in Belgium, Germany. It’s been experienced in Britain and now in Australia.

Mathisen: Mr. Hussain, how easy or difficult is it to track these individuals who as Mr. Emerson just described have a rather circuitous path, often moving through Turkey into Syria, into Iraq? How easy is it to track them so that when they try to come back into the United States or Great Britain, they can be identified, detained, investigated?

Hussain: Well, it’s not straightforward to stop people going or people returning. Turkey is a very popular holiday destination for many British people. And millions go there every year. It’s very easy to get a cheap, low-budget flight to Turkey and then get a coach across to the border and cross over. And if someone’s done that for a few weeks or even longer and decides to come back, unless they’ve popped up on social media and talked openly about what they’ve been doing, we’re not going to really know what they’ve been doing, these individuals. So it is very worrying that it is quite easy, in my opinion, to get back into Europe, certainly Britain or America, certainly very easy to get back into Europe, European territory, from Turkey and from Syria. And part of the problem is the fact that the Turkish government has actually turned a blind eye to these individuals because they have their own tactical objectives of overthrowing the Assad regime. And in the past they have not done enough to secure that border. So many individuals are getting the know-how, getting the motivation from individuals they come across online and then arranging to meet them at the Syrian border so they can go over and join ISIS.

Mathisen: We’re very tight on time. Mr. Hussain, thank you very much. Steve Emerson, where is the risk most prevalent and what would you expect the next sort of terror target to be? Would it be those kinds of streetnappings, or would it be the kind of attack that we saw in the shopping mall in Nairobi about a year ago? Very quickly.

Emerson: I think it would be the latter. I think we’re probably going to see–[although] it’s impossible to predict, a freelance–a homegrown terrorist returning from Iraq or Syria who decides to detonate a bomb someplace remotely or carry out a suicide bombing on his own like we saw in Belgium and in France in the last two years.

Mathisen: Is Europe more vulnerable than the United States, or can you tell?

Emerson: Europe is more vulnerable because there are ten times more numbers of jihadi volunteers, up to 5,000, who have gone over to Iraq and Syria. In the United States, only about 200 to 300 have. But that number is growing, unfortunately.

Mathisen: Gentlemen, we thank you both for your perspectives on this very chilling topic.

Emerson: FBI has been handcuffed in investigating religious extremists in Mosques

 

by Steven Emerson
Interview on Fox News
September 6, 2014

Judge Jeanine Pirro: And with me now, the founder of The Investigative Project, Steve Emerson. Alright Steve, ISIS has Americans worried. How justified are those fears?

Steve Emerson: Very justified. Look, Judge, the problem here is that it’s not just a regional issue. ISIS definitely is a threat in the region in the Middle East, it’s a threat to Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, to Jordan, it’s a threat to Israel, they’ve made statements now they’re going to attack Israel, but they’re also a threat to the United States. There are nearly 300 to 400 American volunteers with U.S. passports now fighting for ISIS. They can return to the United States anytime they want. The FBI has been handcuffed in terms of investigating religious extremists in mosques, as a result of guidelines put out by the attorney general earlier this year. And so therefore, there is… a definite problem now in investigating those militants in the United States who are either recruiting for ISIS or have returned from Syria or Iraq having fought for ISIS, and are ready to carry out freelance or directed terrorist attacks on behalf of ISIS against the United States. That’s the first problem that we’re facing that’s not being met or being handled properly because of the constraints put on law enforcement by this administration.

Pirro: Tell me, Steve; tell the audience exactly what you mean by the restraints being put on the FBI by the Department of Justice.

Emerson: The FBI [has been constrained by] the Department of Justice [which] put out guidelines that restricted the FBI and other law enforcement agencies from using religious factors in identifying threats, national security threats to the United States in the homeland. That is so if someone was a religious extremist, though they didn’t plot to carry out an attack, that [indicator] could not be factored into an investigation, into an intelligence investigation, into identifying them as a potential threat to the United States. Therefore, they [law enforcement] would have to wait until they actually plotted to carry out an attack. Well that’s too late. And unfortunately, what we’re seeing right now is the fact is that we’ve seen massive numbers, increasing numbers of volunteers going over not just from Europe, from Asia and Africa, but we’re seeing ISIS recruiting biophysicists, engineers, social media types, people who have expertise in really carrying out sophisticated terrorist attacks coming back to the United States. And look, if you remember 20-, I got an email from an FBI agent just yesterday, he said, ‘Steve, nobody remembers what happened in the 1980s when all the jihadists were recruited, went over to Afghanistan to fight the Soviets, then came back, and then what happened?’ In February, 1993 they plotted, they almost took down the World Trade Center bombing, [the World] Trade Center at that time; they didn’t, they failed, they [Al Qaeda] returned again in 2001. So the reality is, Judge, that with the handcuffs put on by this administration, there’s a disconnect between what we’re not doing against ISIS, [which is that] we should be decimating them. The president said it may take one, two, three years; we don’t have that kind of time to wait. Within three years –

Pirro: Steve, you know what’s amazing to me, I mean it’s just like the Tsarnaev brothers, the Boston bombers, I mean you get, they’re telling us not once, but twice, these guys are terrorists. We’re letting them go in and out of the country, I mean and you know not calling the Fort Hood shooter a terrorist, but instead it’s workplace violence. Steve Emerson, really fast, these recruiters where are they going to get these potential jihadists, American jihadists?

Emerson: Well they’re going– I mean there’s one recruiter that [had been]… picked up [in the past], well identified, in Bloomington, Minnesota at the Al Farooq Mosque. There are recruiters going around the country in other mosques, where they identify potential volunteers. They test them out to see if they’re willing to die on behalf of martyrdom of the cause for Allah. Then they give them cash, they provide money for their families in case they die. They give them tickets to go to Turkey. Turkey has allowed them, hundreds, to go through to Syria, then to Iraq. And we [the U.S.] count Turkey as one of our top allies. We haven’t put [many of] them on the terrorism watch list, which we should. So there’s a major disconnect, Judge, here between what we should be doing to protect the homeland and protect American citizens versus what the president is doing, in not stopping ISIS on the ground in Iraq, versus what he’s not doing here in the homeland itself.

Pirro: Alright, Steve Emerson, always good to hear your take on things. Thanks so much for being with us.

Emerson: Sure.

****

blindfolded-cop-443x350

Holders Bans Profiling Islamic Terrorists by Religion by Daniel Greenfield, Jan. 17, 2014:

A lot of profiling restrictions are stupid, but in this case religion is the motivation. Banning profiling of perpetrators by their motives is a sure way of crippling investigations.

This is what I predicted was going to happen and I’m surprised it took this long. If terrorists can’t be profiled by religion, then preventing attacks becomes incredibly difficult.

The Justice Department will significantly expand its definition of racial profiling to prohibit federal agents from considering religion, national origin, gender and sexual orientation in their investigations, a government official said Wednesday.

The Bush administration banned profiling in 2003, but with two caveats: It did not apply to national security cases, and it covered only race, not religion, ancestry or other factors.

Since taking office, Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. has been under pressure from Democrats in Congress to eliminate those provisions.

It is not clear whether Mr. Holder also intends to make the rules apply to national security investigations, which would further respond to complaints from Muslim groups.

“Adding religion and national origin is huge,” said Linda Sarsour, advocacy director for the National Network for Arab American Communities. “But if they don’t close the national security loophole, then it’s really irrelevant.”

The Justice Department has been reviewing the rules for several years and has not publicly signaled how it might change them. Mr. Holder disclosed his plans in a meeting on Wednesday with Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York, according to an official briefed on the meeting who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the conversation was private.

Bloomberg, as bad as he was, might have objected, but Bill de Blasio is on the same page as Holder when it comes to empowering terrorists.

 

Also see:

New York Times Censors Ad Decrying Islamist Censorship

by Steven Emerson
IPT News
June 5, 2014

Note: This article originally was published by the Daily Caller.

The New York Times has become complicit in a stealth jihad against free speech in the United States undertaken by Islamists and their sympathizers who masquerade as “civil rights” groups.

The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) recently bought a full-page advocacy adin the print edition of the Times. It discussed extensively the need for the media and government to directly address the reality that many acts of terrorism are rooted in radical Islam — as articulated by the terrorists themselves — and that Islamist groups attempt to deflect attention from radical Islam’s role.

A similar yet more concise version of the ad was scheduled to run on the NYT website the following day. However, something happened from one day to the next that caused the Times to demand that the IPT change the language immediately, or it would pull the ad.

Asked about the new demand, the Times replied: “In addition to being inundated with customer complaints. [sic] I have been asked for the immediate change by the publisher.”

The NYT ordered us to insert the word “radical” before the term “Islamist groups,” so that it read, “Stop the radical Islamist groups from undermining America’s security, liberty and free speech.”

An “Islamist” is not simply an individual who privately observes Islam as his faith. An Islamist is an individual who blurs the ideological lines between personal religion and the nation state — a boundary upheld as one of America’s founding principles and sustained in the First Amendment — to foster a governmental system that relies upon the supremacy of Islam.

“Islamic,” on the other hand, is an adjective that describes an idea or element derived from or inspired by Islam. Islamists promote an Islamic agenda, though some do it more subtly than others.

Groups like the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) are Islamist, hiding behind their Muslim faith and a veneer of “civil rights” as they seek to mainstream an agenda that elevates Islam above other faiths. Their agenda subjugates democracy and supports overseas terrorist groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah and various individuals such as Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader Yousef Qaradawi, who inspires suicide attacks and other forms of violence.

The NYT’s directive to add the word “radical” is a seemingly minor, nuanced change. But here’s why it matters: IPT’s ads hold Islamist groups like CAIR accountable for refusing to acknowledge what many terrorists themselves acknowledge — that their acts of violence were motivated by Islamic text.

That the publisher saw fit to order changes at such a late stage — after the ads had already been approved, purchased by the IPT, and were running on nytimes.com — and that the demands for change escalated so quickly is unusual.

We have to wonder who exactly exerted what kind of pressure.

We can only conclude that the same Islamist forces that the IPT devoted its full-page ad to discussing were at work again — abetted by media sympathizers — in this case, the publisher of the newspaper of record.

CAIR would probably have preferred that the Times shut down the digital ad altogether — as part of its longer-term campaign to paint the IPT as anti-Islam and Islamophobic, while portraying itself as moderate. In a letter to the Times about IPT’s ad, CAIR said, “[IPT's] new ad takes up this defamatory theme by bizarrely attacking the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation’s largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization, for rightly stating that ‘Islam is not the problem; extremism and violent extremism is the problem’ when it comes to terrorist attacks.”

The IPT never said Islam is the problem in its ads. IPT suggested that radical Islam is a problem, and that CAIR — and other Islamists like them — are a problem, for their unwillingness to call out other members of their own faith who use Islam to justify their atrocities. IPT’s print ad specifically lauded those Muslim voices who criticize Islamists. Our digital ad used the word “Islamists” rather than Muslims on purpose.

The very attempt to discuss the role of radical Islam in motivating terrorists spawned a campaign to shut the debate down.

America is not at war with Muslims or Islam. The U.S. remains a welcoming and tolerant nation – one in which Muslims are freer and more secure to practice their faith than anywhere else in the world.

The censorship of free speech by Islamist groups and their media apologists continues to prevent America from addressing the core threat of radical Islam. Recognizing reality is not an attack on Islam or Muslims. Those who say otherwise are the ones of whom we — and, particularly, those in the media such as the NYT — should be wary.

Steven Emerson is the Executive Director of The Investigative Project on Terrorism.

Videos: Experts interviewed on the Boston Marathon Terror Attack

images (51)

Marathon Attack Bombing – Investigators Cont. To Search For Motive:

 

Walid Phares: The Root Of Terror!! – How & When Suspects Became Radicalized 

 

Frank Gaffney: Terror On The Home front! – Threat Of I.E.D.’s More Common In The U.S:

 

Steve Emerson: Terrorist Bomber’s Inspiration Posted Lecture Of Radical Muslim Preacher

 

Erick Stakelbeck: Boston Bombing – Which Mosque Did Terrorist Attend?

 

Dr. Zuhdi Jasser: American Muslim Radicalization and Boston Bombers

 

Brigitte Gabriel discusses the Boston Marathon terrorists:

Steve Emerson: I stand by my film

‘The Grand Deception’ was well-researched, using sources that included faithful Muslims and the FBI. Instead of addressing facts, CAIR chose to attack me personally.

by Steven Emerson
Orange County Register
February 16, 2013

CAIR Leader Calling for Israel’s Destruction Leaves Organization

 

Cyrus McGoldrick

Cyrus McGoldrick

Front Page:

By Joe Kaufman

Cyrus McGoldrick, the head of the New York chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-NY), has announced his departure from the organization. This comes just weeks after McGoldrick was exposed for mimicking a slogan from Hamas calling for Israel’s destruction.

On his Facebook page, on Monday, January 7, McGoldrick stated, “It is with a heavy heart but also some excitement that I announce my departure from CAIR-New York.” He did not say why he was leaving CAIR, though he did ask those reading of his departure to “forgive me my shortcomings.” It was these shortcomings that might have pushed him out of the group.

On November 29, 2012, McGoldrick tweeted and posted to his Facebook page, “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.” Palestinian militants, including Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), have been using this slogan for years. The river represents the Jordan River, and the sea is the Mediterranean – both sides of Israel. It denotes an end to Israel’s existence.

When it comes to making outrageous statements, McGoldrick has gained himself an unflattering reputation. In November, when Israel retaliated against Hamas, who had just fired hundreds of rockets into Israeli civilian neighborhoods, he chose to side with Hamas. He stated, “Gaza under attack for the last few days. May G-d protect them [Hamas] and grant them victory.

McGoldrick has publicly come out in support of a number of convicted terrorists and terrorist associates. They include:

  • Aafia Siddiqui, who had been sentenced to 86 years in prison for shooting at and attempting to kill American soldiers and FBI agents in Afghanistan
  • Tarek Mehanna, who received a 17.5 year sentence for plotting to kill Americans and providing material support to al-Qaeda
  • Lynne Stewart, who had been sentenced to ten years in prison for smuggling messages from imprisoned “Blind Sheikh” Omar Abdel Rahman, the spiritual leader of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, to his violent followers in Egypt

Of them McGoldrick stated, “Until they are free, none of us are free.” That statement was made this month. And about Siddiqui, Mehenna and the Holy Land Foundation (HLF), an American Islamic charity that was shut down in December 2001 for raising millions of dollars for Hamas, he emphatically stated, “We have to fight for them.”

McGoldrick also took up the cause for Khader Adnan, a spokesman and senior West Bank leader of Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ). Adnan had been jailed by the Israelis and was in the midst of a hunger strike, a tactic he had previously used when he had been imprisoned by the Palestinian Authority (PA).

McGoldrick wrote, “We must all be Khader Adnan. I don’t believe in hunger strikes, but our brother is struggling with the only thing he has left: his life.” No mention was made of the scores of innocent people, including Americans, who had brutally lost their lives at the hands of Adnan’s PIJ.

CAIR, like McGoldrick, has had problems relating to terrorism. A number of the group’s officials have been convicted in and/or deported from the United States for terrorist-associated crimes. Indeed, CAIR can credit its very existence to leaders of Hamas and PIJ. CAIR was established as a part of the American Palestine Committee, an umbrella organization created by then-global head of Hamas, Mousa Abu Marzook. And CAIR’s parent organization, the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP) – also part of Marzook’s umbrella – was co-founded by PIJ leader Sami al-Arian.

But while CAIR is no stranger to terror, representatives from the organization, many times, have been careful about voicing support for those convicted of terrorist acts. McGoldrick, on the other hand, is overt and outspoken in his support. He is someone who brings a lot of unwanted attention to CAIR, attention that CAIR doesn’t crave, especially after the group was named a party to Hamas financing not too long ago, especially when CAIR is attempting to paint itself as a civil rights group, especially now as it is trying to worm its way into government circles.

McGoldrick’s words have already gotten him in trouble. When he recently tweeted a wild accusation regarding investigative journalist and counter-terrorism expert Steve Emerson, saying that Emerson had been involved in “child pornography,” Emerson sued for defamation.

It is these things and more – “shortcomings” – that would cause a group such as CAIR to disassociate itself with Cyrus McGoldrick. He is the true face of CAIR but probably a face CAIR would wish to be hidden – at least, for now.

Joe Kaufman is a candidate for United States Congress. He is an expert in the fields of counter-terrorism, foreign affairs and energy independence for America.

CAIR Official Sued for Defamation

Steve Emerson

Steve Emerson

by: Ryan Mauro

Steven Emerson, the executive director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism, is suing Cyrus McGoldrick, the director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations—New York (CAIR-NY), for defamation of character. McGoldrick has a history of making inflammatory statements, including supporting Hamas’s violence and the elimination of the state of Israel.

The lawsuit was sparked by a tweet posted by McGoldrick that states, “Steve Emerson is an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest child pornography case in US history.”

The tweet was mocking the often-mentioned fact that organization McGoldrick serves, CAIR, is designated as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism financing trial in U.S. history. Emerson’s complaint states that it “accuses [him] of having committed a vile crime and constitutes libel per se.”

Emerson’s complaint continued, “Although CAIR describes itself as a Muslim civil liberties advocacy organization, members of Congress, various law enforcement agencies and the FBI have described CAIR as participating in funneling millions of dollars to Hamas. An FBI agent has testified that CAIR is a front group for Hamas.”

McGoldrick is one of CAIR’s most radical voices. During the latest round of fighting between Israel and Hamas, he openly supported Hamas’s acts of terrorism. On November 15, he tweeted, “Palestine is a land occupied by foreign settlers. They have the right to resist, to defend themselves ‘by any means necessary.’ ”

On November 16, he tweeted, “Sign of the times: bloodthirsty Zionists trend #HAMASbumperstickers, then erupt when I acknowledge Palestinian right to resist occupation.”

On November 29, he retweeted a quote from Hamas leader Khaled Meshal: “Meshal: Anyone who is bothered by our rockets is welcome to provide us with accurate weapons to fight the enemy.”

McGoldrick supports Hamas’s goal of wiping Israel off the map.

Cyrus McGoldrick

Cyrus McGoldrick

On November 29, he tweeted, “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free. Insha’Allah.” That same day, he retweeted a post making it clear that he rejects a two-state solution. “What is urgent and overdue for Palestinians is not a ‘state’ but their rights; ending Zionist colonial rule, and return of refugees.”

He also stood by the side of the Muslim Brotherhood Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi when his power grab sparked massive protests, suggesting that the opposition was a puppet of the West and Israel: “Can’t shake the feeling that all this anti-Morsi energy is a last stand by old pro-West/Mubarak/Israel crowd to keep power in judiciary. No?” he tweeted.

Like CAIR as a whole, McGoldrick casts law enforcement as oppressive, bigoted and inhumane. He wrote these two tweets on December 15:

“Maybe I listened to too much Dead Prez growing up, but I can’t accept the liberal ‘ban all guns’ platform. If the cops have ‘em, I want ‘em.”

“Watching and filming the police is one of the few ways we have to defend ourselves. Start a #CopWatch team in your hood!”

McGoldrick has appeared on Iran’s state-controlled propaganda “news” network, Press TV, multiple times. It’s easy to see why the Iranian regime would book him as a guest. Rather than forcefully defend the U.S. and Western values, he blames anti-American terrorism on America’s foreign policy.

Read more at Radical Islam

Steve Emerson, National Security Expert – Obama Refuses To Confront Radical Islam

Steve Emerson: “Obama Not Confronting Radical Islam.” President Barack Obama refusal to admit that America’s real enemy isn’t al-Qaida but radical Islam legitimizes groups that believe there is a conspiracy against Muslims, leading terrorism and national security expert Steve Emerson tells Newsmax.TV.

Must Watch Video!: Steve Emerson interview on Stealth Jihad in America

Steve Emerson of The Investigative Project on Terrorism talks about what the media won’t: Jihad in America:

Steve Emerson has been investigating the threat of Islamic jihad since 1992 and tried to warn us about the threat before 9/11. Emerson first gained national attention with his 1994 PBS documentary Jihad in America, which argued that Islamic militants, supported by prominent Arab- American and Muslim groups, were exploiting constitutionally protected civil liberties to train and organize and to plot acts of terror. The new documentery coming out soon will no doubt be a blockbuster.

Counterterrorism Experts Coughlin and Emerson Blocked from Presenting at Washington Intelligence Forum

From New English Review:

Bill Gertz, Washington Times Pentagon and Intelligence columnist, had a report on October 6th about counterterrorism experts: Steve Coughlin and Steve Emerson, “Anti-Terror Trainers Blocked.” They were apparently denied making scheduled presentations at an event sponsored by the intelligence subcommittee of the Washington Metropolitan Council of Governments because of alleged objections raised by Federal Department of Homeland Security and White House officials. Gertz who is a defender of both Coughlin and Emerson wrote:

The CIA and Department of Homeland Security abruptly canceled a conference in August on homegrown U.S. radical extremism in what officials close to the issue say was an effort to block two conservative anti-terrorism experts from presenting their views.

The conference was slated for Aug. 10 through 12 at agency headquarters in McLean and was to have been hosted by the CIA Threat Management Unit. It was organized by the intelligence subcommittee of the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments.

“The conference topic is a critical one for domestic law enforcement, and the sponsors – in partnership with the Department of Homeland Security -have decided to delay the conference so it can include insights from among other sources, the new National Strategy for Counterterrorism in an updated agenda,” wrote CIA police officer Lt. Joshua Fielder in an email announcing the postponement in early August.

According to people close to the conference, the event was ordered “postponed” after Muslim advocacy groups contacted the Department of Homeland Security and the White House about the scheduled speakers, who included Stephen Coughlin and Steve Emerson, both specialists on the Islamist terror threat.

Mr. Coughlin, a former Pentagon Joint Staff analyst, is one of the most knowledgeable counterterrorism experts specializingin the relationship between Islamic law and terrorism.

Mr. Emerson, head of the Investigative Project on Terrorism, is a leading expert on Islamic violent extremism, financing and operations.

The Department of Homeland Security did not return a call seeking comment.

One intelligence official said the conference was stopped after the White House learned that Mr. Coughlin and Mr. Emerson were speaking.

This official said that to prevent the two experts from taking part in future conferences, the Administration is drafting new guidelines designed to prohibit all U.S. government personnel from teaching classes on Islamic
history or doctrine.

The new rules also will seek to prohibit the use of federal funds to pay contractors for such training.
 

Coughlin responded in an email to this author:

To be specific, I heard that DHS caused the CIA training to be suspended based on their claim that domestic terrorism was in their jurisdiction! In fact, it was my impression, not full proof in this that CIA ultimately had to be ordered to stand down!

That the DHS should convey the objections of Muslim advocacy groups should come as no surprise to Iconoclast readers. We have noted DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano’s appointments of Arif Alikhan as Assistant Secretary at DHS for Policy and Kareem Shora to the Homeland Security Advisory Council. Alikhan, as we have pointed out, was a former Bush Department of Justice official and Deputy Mayor in Los Angeles for Public Safety. In that capacity he was instrumental in killing an L.A.P.D. Muslim community policing project. Alikhan was a member of Muslim Brotherhood front group, MPACT.

This episode is a furtherance of concerns about Muslim Brotherhood influence in defense-related forums. We posted on an alleged victory at the National Defense University Foundation over trustee members R. Leslie Deak and Farouk Shami. They have connections to the Muslim Brotherhood and Palestinian Authority Fatah-PLO Washington Representatives. We apparently spoke too hastily. The current head of the NDUF, Alan Zimmerman, has apparently delayed the Minutes of the Board meeting as if the meeting never occurred and denied the June votes of the board on amendment of the group’s by-laws which called for the removal of both Deak and Shami. Could the reason be an association with a nemesis of Coughlin’s and colleague of Zimmerman’s at DRS Technologies, Inc.,  a major defense contractor, none other than Heshem Islam? Islam was the former Muslim Outreach aide to former Bush Deputy Undersecretary of Defense, Gordon English. Islam may have been instrumental in Coughlin’s removal as a consultant to the Joint Staff in the Pentagon on Islamic Jihad Law doctrine. Islam accused Coughlin of being “a Christian fanatic with a pen.” Islam is a Vice President for International Relations at DRS, owned by Italian aviation and defense technology firm, Finmeccanica. Zimmerman is Vice President for Strategic Initiatives. Both are located in the Washington offices of New Jersey-based, DRS.

The recent episode with the Washington Metropolitan Council of Governments intelligence conference and the NDUF board of trustees’ affair underlines the extent to which Muslim Brotherhood influence has deepened under the Obama Administration, surpassing that of the Bush Administration.