Tag Archives: Tariq Ramadan

Tariq Ramadan Talks About Jihad, Shariah, and “Infiltration”

Posted on by
1
Tariq Ramadan

Tariq Ramadan

By :

Global Muslim Brotherhood Leader Tariq Ramadan has made some interesting comments relating to the concepts of Jihad, Shariah (Islamic Law), and idea that Muslims are involved in “Infiltration.” The remarks were made at a lecture given March 18, 2013 at the Islamic Association of Greater Detroit entitled “American Muslim Identity: Challenges, Opportunities and Prospects”:

(The GMBDW thanks Point De Bascule for the transcription of the remarks)

Excerpt 1 / Terminology – “Jihad is the way we implement sharia”

0:50:04 The first challenge that we have, that every one of you have here, has here, is terminology. In fact, if you want Islam to depart of the American narrative, we should be able to speak Islam in English, in the English language by knowing what we are talking about and to regain, reshape, redefine the words that we are using. Don’t let anyone make sharia a dirty word. Don’t let anyone speak about jihad as if it’s a holy war. Don’t let anyone speak about the way we, as Muslims, we speak about the values that are ours, in a way which is done by Orientalists and not by ourselves. The first, now, to challenge some definitions when it comes to Islam is us, in the way we speak about our values There is no way to be a Muslim if we don’t understand a deep … if we don’t have a deep understanding of what sharia is and jihad is. Jihad is the way we implement sharia by saying… It has nothing to do with holy war. It’s something which has something to do with resistance and positive presence.

[Quote in Arabic]

0:51:24 We’ll resist the bad and we are here to promote the good. Not only for us, for all the people because the best amongst us is the best for humanity, as the prophet (saw) said. So, this is where it’s important, for us, to have this theoretical challenge is terminology. And I am sorry to tell you that many of you, you might rely on the imams on this but you have to do the job. You should have basic understanding of the Islamic terminology in English. This is the way to resist because language is power.

Excerpt 2 / Tariq Ramadan pushes American Muslims “not to infiltrate”, just to become journalists and “to shape the perceptions”

1:39:58 What is important in our number, our number as Muslims, is not that we are converting people. It’s by having an important number… the more committed Muslims we have, the more witnesses we have and the more we change mindset around us. If we understand. The second thing that we have to understand is that we live in a country where the mainstream media now are powerful but, at the same time, they are not trusted by many people. Listen to the Americans. Listen to the Europeans. They don’t trust them. They go now to internet, they go to alternative media. This is where we have to be present. This is where we have to promote texts, videos, lectures, articles… We have to do the job. We are not going to wait for a mainstream so-called “Islamic media” to appear, to… you know… Many people were very happy with Al-Jazeera… I, myself, from the very beginning was very cautious. Because I don’t want the other side of you know something which is… the tension. It’s to do the same on the other side. I want something which is a bit deeper. But what we have to do as Muslims is to use the alternative media and we have. And then, for example, now you can have hundreds, thousands, millions of people who can just watch some of the things that we are promoting.

So, this is also something that we have to be skilled. Media, journalism is also something… You know, when I was once saying: we need more Muslims and more American Muslims being journalists… One of the journalist who heard that, he said: “Oh! Tariq Ramadan is pushing the Muslims to infiltrate.” I never said that. What I said is not to infiltrate, it’s just to be a journalist. Because the journalist, when you come with your background, of course you should be objective or try to be the most objective but you are coming with a background, and you come with another vision… We have to push our daughters and our sons not only to be medical doctors, not only to be computer scientists but journalists to deal with this, to deal with academia because within academia we have all this business: to shape the perceptions, to help the people…

[…]

1:42:52 I wouldn’t care too much about, you know, the big media. They are changing. It’s going to… It is powerful but we have the power of our presence, we have the power of our principles and we have the power of alternative media. And we should send our children, when they want to do so to… in the field of journalism, to be able to be part of the whole thing and then things are changing.

Last example that I want to give you and I keep on repeating this because we don’t realize this, is… You have trends here who are very much promoting Islamophobia and they are saying, for example: Europe is becoming Eurabia. But why are they saying this? They are saying this because they know something. And once again: don’t work only with emotions and perceptions. Come to facts, figures. Study. Know what is happening. The evolution of history. In less than…

For the full video, go here

Of course, depending upon one’s view of Dr. Ramadan, these remarks can be read either as a goodwill effort to properly communicate Islamic concepts or a deliberate attempt to “shape the perceptions” according to the wishes of the Global Muslim Brotherhood.

Read more at The Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Watch

 

Terrorists Can Speak in Canada, Pamela Geller Can’t

Posted on by
1

canadafreespeechBy Daniel Greenfield:

The Canadian reality is still different than the American reality. And the Canadian reality is different than the European reality. But the gaps between the three are shrinking.

York Regional Police threatened to remove a rabbi as one of the force’s chaplains if he hosted a controversial anti-Islamist speaker at his Thornhill synagogue.

Insp. Ricky Veerappan, of the force’s diversity, equity and inclusion bureau, confirmed he and officers from the service’s hate crimes unit met with Rabbi Mendel Kaplan of the Chabad Flamingo Synagogue on Tuesday.

Veerappan said he told Kaplan that Geller’s speech “would not be endorsed by York Regional Police” and that the rabbi’s role as a force chaplain would be thrown into question if he were to permit the event.

“If he did (host Geller), then we’d have to reassess our relationship with (Kaplan),” Veerappan said. “We serve the needs of the entire community. Some of the stuff that Ms. Geller speaks about runs contrary to the values of York Regional Police and the work we do in engaging our communities.”

Veerappan said a member of York Region’s Muslim community, whom he wouldn’t identify, brought Geller’s scheduled talk to the attention of police.

In March, the University of Toronto hosted controversial Muslim lecturer Tariq Ramadan, who has also spoken in Toronto at the annual Islamic faith conference, Reviving the Islamic Spirit. In October, Pakistani politician Imran Khan, a controversial critic of the U.S. war on terror, spoke in Brampton. Leila Khaled, a Palestinian revolutionary from the 1970s, is set speak at University of British Columbia on May 4.

The rules are fairly straightforward. Muslims are allowed to do anything they like because interfering with them might rile them up. And non-Muslims are only allowed to praise Islam because otherwise Muslims might get riled up.

There is no standard of behavior. Only a security concept that stakes everything on not riling Muslims up.  And that means free speech goes by the wayside.

Obama officials have engaged in similar efforts to silence and even imprison those who burned Korans or made movies offensive to Muslims. Every Western country is falling under the same mandate that conflates national security with not offending Muslims.

In the name of that inoffensiveness, Muslim speakers who promote terrorism are tolerated in order not to offend the Muslims who might otherwise turn to terrorism. And non-Muslims who oppose terrorism are silenced because if they speak, Muslims might turn to terrorism.

This is the upside down world that appeasement has given us where black is white and good is evil.

Read more at Front Page

 

Related articles

Tariq Ramadan Center To Hold International Conference; Many Global Muslim Brotherhood Luminaries To Attend

Posted on by
1

 

Tariq Ramadan

Tariq Ramadan

GlobalMB @ March 12, 2013

A Middle Eastern news portal is reporting that the Research Center for Islamic Legislation and Ethics (CILE), a new research center headed by Global Muslim Brotherhood figure Tariq Ramadan, is holding an international conference to be attended by a number of Global Muslim Brotherhood luminaries. According to an Al Bawaba report:

Published March 10th, 2013 – 04:43 GMT The Research Center for Islamic Legislation and Ethics (CILE) will be holding a high-level international conference entitled ‘Arts and Politics from an Islamic Perspective: Critical Questions’ on March 9th, 2013. This is the first such event to be organised by CILE, a member of Qatar Foundation for Education, Science and Community Development. The one-day conference will take place at Qatar Foundation’s Student Center, and aims to bring together scholars of Islamic jurisprudence, artists and politicians to discuss and tackle critical issues pertinent to today’s cultural and political spheres. A number of well-regarded experts will partake in the seminar. Participants in the first session, ‘Islamic Ethics’, will include Sheikh Dr Yusuf Al Qaradawi, Chairman of the International Union of Muslim Scholars; Sheikh Dr Ali Al-Qaradaghi, Secretary General of the International Union of Muslim Scholars; Sheikh Dr Ahmed Raissouni, Chairman of the League of Sunni Scholars; and Professor Muhammad Kamal Hassan, Rector of the International Islamic University of Malaysia. The second session will discuss ‘Ethics and Arts’. Participants will include the British singer/songwriter Dr Yusuf Islam, Egyptian singer and guitarist Hamza Namira, Moroccan singer and composer Saloua Chaoudry, and Egyptian researcher and Islamic calligrapher Dr Ahmed Moustafa. The third and final panel, ‘Politics and Ethics’, will include Dr Abdel Moneim Abul Futuh, former Egyptian presidential candidate, prominent Turkish sociologist Prof Nilufer Gole, and Prof Norman Finkelstein, the American political scientist, activist and author. CILE, a member of the Qatar Faculty of Islamic Studies, specialises in Islamic legislation and ethical thought, with a main focus on applied principles. The centre has a vision of reform that is guided by the fundamental tenets of the Holy Qur’an and the Sunnah (teachings of Prophet Mohammed), and the Maqasid (objectives) of Islamic Jurisprudence. CILE aims to bring about a more just and moral world through a methodological and theoretical framework that can lead to practical applications and tangible contributions.”

Tariq Ramadan is perhaps best described as an independent power center within the global Brotherhood with sufficient stature as the son of Said Ramadan, and the grandson of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood to challenge positions taken by important Brotherhood leaders. His statements and writings have been extensively analyzed and he has been accused by critics of promoting anti-Semitism and fundamentalism, albeit by subtle means. On the other hand, his supporters promote him as as example of an Islamic reformer who is in the forefront of developing a “Euro Islam.” Ramadan is currently professor of Islamic Studies at the University of Oxford’s Faculty of Theology and senior research fellow at St. Antony’s College (Oxford), Dohisha University (Kyoto, Japan) and at the Lokahi Foundation (London). Previous posts discussed his dismissal from his positions as an adviser on integration for the city of Rotterdam and from a Dutch University over his role as a talk show host on Iranian TV. A ban on Ramadan traveling to the US was lifted in January 2010 and several posts have discussed his visits to the US where he appeared at various US Muslim Brotherhood venues including giving the keynote at the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR)-Chicago annual banquet in April 2010.

Qaradawi, a virulent anti-Semite is often referred to here as the most important leader of the global Muslim Brotherhood, an acknowledgement of his role as the de facto spiritual leader of the movement. In 2004, Qaradawi turned down the offer to lead the Egyptian Brotherhood after the death of the Supreme Guide. Based in Qatar, Sheikh Qaradawi has reportedly amassed substantial wealth through his role as Shari’ah adviser to many important Islamic banks and funds. He is also considered to be the “spiritual guide” for Hamas and his fatwas in support of suicide bombings against Israeli citizens were instrumental in the development of the phenomenon. A recent post has discussed a video compilation of Qaradawi’s extremist statements. A post from August reported that  Qaradawi had been included as part of a list of Islamic scholars to be appointed to an Egyptian national board of senior Islamic scholars (Ulema). Al-Azhar is considered to be the main center of Islamic and Arabic learning in the world.

Read more

Also see Discover The Networks Profile on Tariq Ramadan

 

Justin Trudeau’s Islamist Revival

Posted on by
5

790_largeby David B. Harris

Nothing says bug-eyed clerical fanaticism more than inviting a hate-spewing Saudi cleric to address your religious revival meeting. But this is part of the under-reported history of the Reviving the Islamic Spirit (RIS) Convention, a conference that Justin Trudeau, a frontrunner in Canada’s Liberal Party leadership race – and son of former Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau – will address this weekend in Montreal. It’s also why moderate Muslims and non-Muslims are aghast at the prospect of Trudeau’s presence legitimizing the conference and some of its notables.

Although organizers pitch the gathering as “A Unique Youth Effort” “to help overcome new challenges of communication and integration” and “reviv[e] the Islamic tradition of education, tolerance and introspection,” there is reason to be concerned. Aspects of the multi-year history and present-day manifestations of RIS invite questions about ideology and influences at play.

This year’s conference was initially sponsored in part by IRFAN-Canada, an international Muslim relief entity that has seen its federal charitable tax status yanked by Ottawa, as a result of the Canada Revenue Agency’s belief that millions in contributions went to “relieve” the Hamas terror organization. Although exposure of this background forced IRFAN’s eleventh-hour cosmetic removal as an RIS sponsor, it is not evident that all remaining sponsors are clear of radical taint. UBS Bank recently blocked the overseas account of British-based charity and RIS 2012 sponsor Islamic Relief, a situation which an Islamic Relief official reportedly attributes to the technicalities of counterterrorism regulations. Meanwhile, some have questions about the uneven ideological record of one or two prominent figures attached to sponsoring organization Zaytuna College, an Islamic institution in Berkeley, Calif.

And, yes, the inevitable Tariq Ramadan, the charming, soft-spoken and dupe-seducing scion of the extremist Muslim Brotherhood – a man who famously called for a moratorium, rather than a ban, on the stoning of women, and avoids condemning Hamas – will also speak at the event. Ramadan is an RIS veteran speaker whose apparent Muslim Brotherhood link offers little reassurance when taken in concert with a Brotherhood strategic plan for Canada and the United States which prescribes “a grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house.”

Meanwhile, a journalist has exposed expected RIS 2012 speaker Yassir Fazaga as a fixture of Peace TV, an outlet with radical presenters, including Yusuf Islam – the former Cat Stevens – who called for author Salman Rushdie’s death and spoke at the 2009 RIS.

But, years ago, those of us in intelligence who studied RIS conferences had concluded that RIS’s problems exceeded even these present-day issues.

Indeed, the RIS’s history of invited speakers includes some dignitaries who would give pause to people of conscience, especially when speakers might be considered models for youth and other convention attendees. For example, there was distinguished American neo-Nazi William W. Baker at the 2004 gathering. Known for establishing something dubbed Christians and Muslims for Peace (CAMP), Baker has rounded publicly on “belligerent American Jews.” “[H]is apparent goal,” wrote a reporter a year or two before his RIS invitation, is “the creation of a united Christian-Muslim front against Jews and other groups.”

Middle East scholar Daniel Pipes complained that now-disgraced former RCMP Commissioner Giuliano Zaccardelli, then-Toronto Police Chief (and now federal Tory Minister) Julian Fantino and Mayor David Miller appeared at the Toronto conference, “thereby giving it – and by implication, William W. Baker – their blessing.” Zaccardelli’s pander-filled speech was memorable. Even the social-democratic NDP’s Jack Layton could not resist addressing an RIS meet.

For “bridge-building” and interfaith work, there was RIS 2006 speaker Imam Siraj Wahhaj, US unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

Another RIS invitee was Sheik Bilal Philips, a Canadian imam who is an unindicted co-conspirator in that bombing, favors death for homosexuals in Muslim lands, and fancies punitive amputations, lashings and public executions. From Kenya to Germany to Australia, he has been banned and deported on national security grounds.

The bug-eyed invitee mentioned above was reportedly Sheikh Abd Al-Rahman Al-Sudais, imam of Mecca’s Grand Mosque. Well before his invitation to speak at the 2004 RIS, Al-Sudais said “Jews of yesterday are the evil forefathers of the even more evil Jews of today: infidels … prophet murderers, the scum of the human race, accursed by Allah, who turned them into apes and pigs.” “[A]n ongoing continuum of deceit, obstinacy, licentiousness, evil, and corruption,” too. Christians?: idolators – “worshippers of the cross” – as were hideous “idol worshipping Hindus.”

This was a bridge-building too far, and Canada’s government barred entry to the Saudi imam.

As it did to RIS 2010 invitee (and previous speaker) Indian physician-preacher Zakir Naik, thought to have a crush on Osama bin Laden. “[E]very Muslim should be a terrorist,” says Naik, and Jews are “our staunchest enemy.” At the 2005 RIS, Naik pressed Islamic Sharia law upon America, complete with death penalties for homosexuals, heavy veiling for women. There was more than a dash of false equivalence in his comparing of the targeted civilian deaths of 9/11, and the accidental civilian casualties in Afghanistan combat. Naik’s ambiguous position on suicide bombing included the view that it “should be done under proper guidance” – surely a constructive thought for susceptible youth juggling contemporary responsibilities and trying to reach that life-balance between school and demolitions. Naik is progressive inasmuch as he believes wives should be beaten only “lightly.”

Several years ago, Britain’s Sheikh Riyadh ul-Haq spoke at an RIS convention in Toronto. Reports point to Indian-born ul-Haq’s enthusiastic paraphrasing of the Quran in remarks made on another occasion: “the ones who are bitterest in their enmity towards Muslims, the most unrelenting, unforgiving, are the Jews and the mushrikeen, idolators in all their forms.” Today’s “chief idolators,” he adds, are the Hindus.

U.S. authorities have taken an interest in RIS, and detained some American Muslims returning from the 2004 RIS conference in Toronto. Department of Homeland Security: “we had credible intelligence that conferences similar to the one from which these individuals were leaving were being used by terrorist organizations to fundraise and to hide the travel of terrorists themselves.” The Saudi-funded, extremist-sympathetic Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) – later an unindicted co-conspirator in a major terror funding U.S. prosecution, and the mother group of a Canadian chapter, CAIR-CAN, now attacking critics of this week’s conference – sued the American government, and lost.

Border authorities, asserted the supportive U.S. appeals court, “had reason to believe that terrorists, or those with terrorist ties, would be attending the RIS conference.”

It was at this Reviving the Islamic Spirit conference – presumably in the midst of some of its participants’ condemnations of liberal coexistence – that a jargon-laced greeting was read aloud from a letter from then-Prime Minister Paul Martin. “[T]his year’s conference,” he intoned on behalf of the Government of Canada, “adds to the fabric of our nation and strengthens our social foundations by making our communities more dynamic, culturally rich, and cohesive.” U.S. border authorities might have taken another view.

Now comes the Reviving the Islamic Spirit 2012 conclave. You’ve heard about Tariq Ramadan and the rest, but what about other invitees who will be joining this month’s Montreal conventioneers?

Read the rest at IPT

David B. Harris is a Canadian lawyer with three decades’ experience in intelligence affairs, and serves as Director of the International Intelligence Program, INSIGNIS Strategic Research Inc. He is on the advisory board of the Council for Muslims Facing Tomorrow (MFT), although opinions expressed here are his alone.

Tariq Ramadan and the Islamization of Europe

Posted on by
Reply

By Jacob Thomas/June Engdahl:

…Ramadan and other serious Islamic scholars, enjoying the benefits of that heritage, are offering Islam as an alternative to the West’s loss of faith and excess worldliness. Western leaders, in the name of political correctness, denigrate their own honorable traditions — both religious and secular. Sensitivity to its past mistakes lingers even after they have been remedied. The many past and present benefits the West has brought to mankind are ignored. Tolerance has lost its true meaning of allowing for all ideas to get an airing. It has been replaced with a definition of tolerance that allows only for ideas that are currently politically correct. How convenient for Tariq Ramadan’s purposes is such a society so guilt-ridden and infected with political correctness that it often stands wide-eyed and accepting of the alternative, absolutist faith that is Islam.

It is well known that political correctness is pervasive on both sides of the Atlantic in all aspects of society. The liberal intelligentsia in government, academia and the professions has determined what kind of discourse is reasonable and appropriate and what is not. They are becoming ever more self-consciously cautious in all they say about Islam and what they will tolerate others saying about it. The same self-censorious attitude prevails in much of the Western mainline media. Fear of being charged with Islamophobia by the reigning principalities and powers is stronger than the love of truth.

But there are still many who do not abide by the strictures of political correctness. Thanks to the Internet, many in the closed world of the Islamic Ummah can read online in their native Arabic, the works of secular reformist thinkers. Topics of great interest are discussed with utter frankness, unrestrained from the usual governmental controls that suffocate the freedom of the conventional print press.

An article I recently found in Al-Awan[1] which was actually written just over three years ago (26 August 2009) is a good example of positive trends from secular Arab intellectuals. The writer is a member of “The Secular Center for the Study of Islamics,” and his topic was the role of Tariq Ramadan, in “The Islamization of Europe.” He has very perceptive things to say about this very influential shaper of the West’s understanding of Islam. They are still pertinent today.

Before I present his remarks, and make some reflections on them, a little background on Tariq Ramadan is in order for those not yet familiar with his Islamic pedigree.

He is a direct descendent of Hassan al-Banna, whose legacy is unparalleled in the modern history of Islam.[2] Al-Banna may be regarded as the father of Political Islam. Some of his followers over the years engaged in assassinations of prominent Egyptian leaders.

Two years after Colonel Gamal abdul-Nasser toppled the monarchy in July, 1952; the Muslim Brotherhood attempted his assassination as he was delivering a speech in Alexandria, in October, 1954. It was foiled and the organization was banned, and many of its members were given long prison sentences. Others managed to flee to Europe and America, where they continued their subversive activities in the promotion of their radical agenda.

One of those young members of the banned organization, Said Ramadan (pronouncedSa’eed) who found refuge in West Germany, was a son-in-law of Hassan al-Banna. Eventually, Said settled in Switzerland, where his son Tariq was born! The role of Said in the “importation” of radical Islam to Europe after the Second World War is detailed in a fascinating book, “A Mosque in Munich,” by the investigative journalist and author, Ian Johnson. A review of the book, “Will Islamic infiltration of Europe Succeed in Transforming it into the House of Islam?”[3] was posted on this website and may be accessed on the link mentioned in the endnote.

After settling in Switzerland, Said Ramadan continued his activities as a shrewd propagandist for Islam. With an evident seriousness of purpose, he named his son Tariq after the North African Muslim leader Tariq ibn Ziyad, who led his armies in the crossing of the narrow strait between Africa and Europe, and began the conquest of Spain in 710 A.D. The strait was named Gibraltar, the westernized term for Jabal Tariq, i.e.Tariq’s Mountain. Thus Islam gained a foothold in southwestern Europe which lasted until 1492!

Tariq Ramadan is certainly unique. Living in the liberal, secular West and dealing with both it and the harsh, exclusive, often irrational dictates of his Islamic faith is a huge challenge. Will he succeed in bringing his forebears’ goals to fruition? He has shown up in cartoons with a forked tongue. What he says in lectures depends on whether his audience is Western or Muslim. Many Western academic institutions, often recipients of largesse from Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern money, promote him on their campuses and on the lecture circuit.

Read more at Islam Watch

 

Muslim Brotherhood-ISNA Convention: “Don’t Talk to the FBI”

Posted on by
1

Pamela Geller:

Suhail Khan, Tariq Ramadan, John Esposito, the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf and Karen Armstrong all appeared at the ISNA convention, thereby revealing their true colors. This is what former FBI agent John Guandolo says about ISNA:

  • The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) is the largest  Muslim Brotherhood (MB) organization in North America, created to be the “nucleus” for the Islamic Movement, according to MB documents seized by the FBI in Annandale, Virginia in 2004.
  • Because of the evidence ISNA is a Brotherhood front, as well as  the numerous financial documents detailing money going directly from  ISNA and their banks to Hamas entities overseas, ISNA is an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest Hamas trial ever successfully prosecuted in U.S. history (US v. Holy Land Foundation), which was adjudicated in 2008 in Dallas, Texas.
  • When ISNA filed a motion with the federal court to have their  name removed from the unindicted co-conspirator list, the government  stated that ISNA exists to be a financial support entity for Hamas. The  federal judge agreed stating the government provided “ample evidence” and left ISNA on the list. A three-judge appellate panel unanimously agreed and left ISNA on the unindicted co-conspirator list.
  • ISNA’s two key directors and its President, Mohamed Magid (pictured above), all work with Secretary Clinton and her office. So, the leaders of a Hamas-supporting entity are advising the U.S. Secretary of State.

Here is the official TVC/VAST report on the Hamas-linked Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) convention, by an eyewitness who managed to get in:

ISNA CONVENTION OFFERS TWO VIEWS OF ISLAM – THE MANUFACTURED PUBLIC PERSONA AND THE TRUTH

Washington, DC – The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) 2012 annual convention offered some stark contrasts between the Islam portrayed in CAIR press releases and speeches and the unavoidable facts about Islam’s size and objectives.

A project of the Traditional Values Coalition (TVC) and the Virginia Anti-Shariah Task Force (VAST) monitored several key briefings and presentations at the convention.

Sessions ran the gamut from “Islamic Finance” to Islam’s Response to Domestic Violence in the Muslim Community to If You Care About Your Future-I Spy With My NYPD Eye.

Some speakers criticized President Barack Obama for “letting down” Islam and not doing enough to advance its cause in America.  One official, CAIR Founder and long-time HAMAS/Muslim Brotherhood operative Nihad Awad, complained that the White House treats him and other activists like an ugly step-child.

Awad said that Muslim names are not published on the official White House visitor’s log.

“Even those who go to the White House and have a reception that’s great.  But their names are not published on the official list. Why?  Because Muslim money and votes are radioactive.”

Nihad Awad, ISNA Annual Convention September 1, 2012

Panel on Forming a More Perfect Union

The general rule established in many presentations was “Don’t Talk to the FBI”, don’t allow anylaw enforcement to enter your home or business without a search warrant and never talk with any police without a lawyer present.

Substantial portions of the convention program were devoted to vilifying three law enforcement agencies– the Intelligence Division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the New York City Police Department (NYPD), and the Joint Taskforce on Terrorism.

Deceptively named, the panel on “Working with Law Enforcement to Uphold our Civil Liberties” was anything but that.  All three panelists attacked law enforcement for using various techniques to monitor individuals believed to be a threat to our nation’s security.   Additionally, each speaker cautioned that law enforcement agencies have had too much access to the Muslim community with disastrous results.

Mike German, former FBI agent and now ACLU Policy Counsel on National Security, Immigration and Privacy repeatedly warned against speaking to the FBI and otherlaw enforcement. German advised ISNA members and allies that when approached by the FBI ask which division they are in. If they are from the FBI’s Office of Community Outreach or Office of Public Affairs, German suggested it was probably ok to speak with them.  However, if they were from the FBI Intelligence Division or the Joint Taskforce on Terrorism –German warned that they were not to be trusted and advised that individuals needed a lawyerpresent when speaking to them.

Ms. Rabia Chaudry also warned the Muslim community not to speak with law enforcement without a lawyer, stating that there needed to be some new “rules of engagement.”   Like many other speakers at the convention, she expressed outrage that government officials would dare monitor any Muslims or suggest their involvement in terrorism.

Not one panelist, in various sessions, acknowledged the reality of “home-grown terrorism.”   Rather, speakers and attendees alike mocked both the idea and Congressman Peter King of New York for holding Congressional hearings.

Chaudry repeatedly made it clear that the FBI, NYPD -who she called the “Big Bad Wolf”- and other agencies were not to be trusted.

Chaudry works with the Saudi-funded front group Center for Muslim Christian Understanding, serves as an immigration lawyer, as well as a board member of the Connecticut ACLU and is President of the Safe Nation Collaborative.  As President of the collaborative, Chaudry is working with the Obama Administration to rewrite the training manuals used to teach law enforcement personnel about the Islamist threat to America. She and others also want to ensure the new training manuals are “culturally sensitive”.

James Zogby, President of the Arab American Institute and co-founder and chairman of the Palestine Human Rights Campaign continued the rant against law enforcementand the Obama Administration, complaining that things are “seen through the lens of Israel.”

Zogby encouraged the Muslim community to use “old fashioned guilt” tactics to extract what they want from the White House, Obama Administration and law enforcement as a result of law enforcementmonitoring the Muslim community. He referenced a tough letter he had sent to the White House as an “ultimatum.

Referring to law enforcement, Zogby stated, you are “screwing up the world because you don’t talk to us” and then boldly proclaimed that

“This is no longer a white world.  This world is dominated by us, people of color.” James Zogby, ISNA Annual Convention, September 2, 2012

Panel on Working with Law Enforcement to Uphold our Civil Liberties

Zogby a delegate to the Democrat National Convention, opposed reinstating language in the party platform recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel because he said it was pandering to the Jewish vote.  Zogby is the brother of pollster John Zogby.

Conference speakers estimated the Muslim population of America as either “2-3 million” or “7 million”,depending on which version suited the argument they were making at the moment.

Many speakers including Suhail Kahn focused on the work of Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer andlawyer David Yerushalmi.  An extensive campaign was outlined to stop what speakers said was a growing public sentiment against Shariah and challenge Geller/Spencer’s media presence and busy schedule of public speeches in strategic states.

Of course, ISNA also included an angry rant about the dominance of Israel on the American political scene and set a legislative priority of eliminating all U.S. foreign aid to the state of Israel.

The focus of the convention’s program was on three key messages:

  1. Refining Islam’s public image and presenting an apologetics course on what to do when confronted about the facts concerning Islam’s campaign to dominate the West.
  2. Continue the barrage of attacks on the most effective law enforcement agencies (FBI, NYPD, etc.) and challenge their efforts to stop the use of non-profit front groups to launder American dollars on their way to arming and supplying front-line terrorists here and in other countries.  (Increasing regulation and scrutiny of electronic fundtransfers is a grave concern to the ISNA attendees.)
  3. Continuing efforts to affect official Washington while recognizing that local police and government officials may be a more fertile ground for winning greater control.

Read the rest at Atlas Shrugs

Suhail Khan, John Esposito, Karen Armstrong, Tariq Ramadan, Feisal Abdul Rauf appear at Hamas- and Muslim Brotherhood-linked ISNA convention

Posted on by
3

Jihad Watch:

Imagine the outcry if a prominent Republican Party operative, an imam publicly dedicated to “building bridges” with non-Muslims, and three world-renowned Islamic scholars appeared at a convention of a group closely linked to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. You’re right, there would be no outcry at all, for that is exactly what happened over the weekend, as Suhail Khan, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, John Esposito, Karen Armstrong and Tariq Ramadan appeared, along with Nihad Awad of Hamas-linked CAIR, at the annual convention of the Hamas- and Muslim Brotherhood-linked Islamic Society of North America (ISNA).

According to former FBI agent John Guandolo:

  • The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) is the largest  Muslim Brotherhood (MB) organization in North America, created to be the “nucleus” for the Islamic Movement, according to MB documents seized by the FBI in Annandale, Virginia in 2004.
  • Because of the evidence ISNA is a Brotherhood front, as well as  the numerous financial documents detailing money going directly from  ISNA and their banks to Hamas entities overseas, ISNA is an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest Hamas trial ever successfully prosecuted in U.S. history (US v. Holy Land Foundation), which was adjudicated in 2008 in Dallas, Texas.
  • When ISNA filed a motion with the federal court to have their  name removed from the unindicted co-conspirator list, the government  stated that ISNA exists to be a financial support entity for Hamas. The  federal judge agreed stating the government provided “ample evidence” and left ISNA on the list. A three-judge appellate panel unanimously agreed and left ISNA on the unindicted co-conspirator list.
  • ISNA’s two key directors and its President, Mohamed Magid (pictured above), all work with Secretary Clinton and her office. So, the leaders of a Hamas-supporting entity are advising the U.S. Secretary of State.

But none of that stopped these luminaries, who of course do not hesitate to try to tar the defenders of freedom with guilt by association at every possible turn, while not hesitating to associate with a highly unsavory group connected to violent jihadis and pro-Sharia Islamic supremacists.

From the ISNA convention program:

Related articles

Islamists, Military on a Collision Course in Egypt

Posted on by
Reply

Mursi and Shafiq

By Rick Moran

Egyptians finished two days of voting on Sunday, the first relatively free election for president in their history. But indications are that only about 15% of Egypt’s 50 million eligible voters bothered to cast ballots. The low turnout was a direct result of a Supreme Court decision on Thursday that dissolved the Islamist-dominated parliament and struck down a law that would have prevented former Mubarak-era prime Minister, Ahmed Shafiq, from running for president. The twin blows caught the Muslim Brotherhood flat footed as the military moved incredibly swiftly to seize legislative power and will now issue a “constitutional declaration” that defines the powers of the president in the absence of a new constitution. This forces the Muslim Brotherhood to make a choice: Either deal with the military on power sharing or take to the streets and put pressure on the generals to give in to their demands.

While many Egyptians were angry at the “soft coup” pulled off by the military, the actions of the court and military council had the effect of generating enormous cynicism among the population, which now sees the revolution as being overturned by the old regime. We have no choice at all,” said Eid Muhamed, who works in a tea house in Cairo. “Both of them are awful,” he added.

This belief is widespread across Egypt and no doubt contributed to the ennui that has gripped the electorate. Egypt’s political culture, which already sees a “hidden hand” that manipulates events so that they redound in favor of the rich and powerful, seems vindicated in that belief with the actions of the military and especially their allies in the courts. Most judges are Mubarak-era holdovers who are vehemently opposed to democratic change. Ahmed al-Zend, head of the influential Judges Club, representing most of Egypt’s jurists, denounced the parliament and threatened to overturn legislation passed by the elected body. “From this day forward, judges will have a say in determining the future of this country and its fate. We will not leave it to you to do with what you want.”

Some observers wonder whether the Muslim Brotherhood didn’t blow their chance at presiding over a transition to democracy in Egypt. Although there is no evidence, it was widely believed that the Brotherhood’s presidential candidate, Mohammed Morsi, struck a deal with the military on the election. Regardless of whether that’s true, many Egyptians believe that the Muslim Brotherhood overreached and tried to acquire too much power, too quickly. The resulting backlash hurt Morsi’s vote total in the first round of presidential voting last month, and may have affected the sympathy of voters who look upon the court’s action in dissolving parliament not as unfavorably as one might expect.

What then, do the Egyptian people want, if not a transition to democracy? The political chaos and demonstrations of the previous 16 months have not worn well on most ordinary Egyptians who have seen food become scarce, the economy near collapse, and their personal security threatened by gangs of thugs who have taken advantage of the lapse in police protection to terrify neighborhoods. “We have no security. Every day there are attacks against people in the neighborhood, and there are absolutely no police, no one to turn to for help,” said Hajja Fatma, a woman from a poor Cairo neighborhood. “They hurt old people, rob homes, and kidnap children for ransom. Allah, Allah, we need order,” she added.

Many observers are saying that the military council ruling Egypt has already won the presidential race. That’s because no matter who is elected, they will have to serve under a parliament elected by rules set down by the military, act under a constitution that will be drawn up by an assembly that will probably be appointed by the military, and would likely be constrained to act by laws approved by the military.

The military council took another step to augment their power by issuing a constitutional decree that the Washington Post reports “gave the armed forces vast powers and appeared to give the presidency a subservient role.”

The declaration, published in the official state gazette, establishes that the president will have no control over the military’s budget or leadership and will not be authorized to declare war without the consent of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces.

The document said the military would soon appoint a body to draft a new constitution, which would be put to a public referendum within three months. Once a new charter is in place, an election will be held to chose a parliament that will replace the Islamist-dominated one dissolved Thursday by the country’s top court.

The Muslim Brothers, who were caught by surprise when the court destroyed their power base by dissolving parliament, appear to be regaining their equilibrium. After the polls closed Sunday night, the Brotherhood announced that it had rejected the court order dissolving parliament, calling it a “coup against the entire democratic process.” They also rejected the constitutional decree and vowed that the constituent assembly they appointed in parliament last week to create the new constitution will write the new charter, not the generals.

This would seem to put the two power centers of Egyptian politics on a collision course. But the Islamists have struck deals with the military previously, and it is possible they will accede to the new order as long as Morsi is declared the winner of the election and new rules governing the election of members of parliament don’t shut them out of power. For their part, the generals might accept sharing power with the Brotherhood as long as they maintain their independence from government — much like the Pakistani generals enjoy in that country.

Read more at Front Page

Further analysis from Bare Naked Islam:

So, did the Egyptian Army “use” the Muslim Brotherhood as a smokescreen to help get the Mubarak candidate into office?

I certainly hope so. Tariq Ramadan addresses this issue as polls in Egypt are now closed and results are starting to trickle in.

Tariq Ramadan was banned from entering this country by George W Bush because of his terrorist ties. As soon as Obama got in, Hillary Clinton removed the ban on him. More than likely, Ramadan is supporting the Muslim Brotherhood, but he thinks the Mubarak candidate has a better shot of winning. And that would be good for the Copts, good for Israel, and good for America. It won’t be a good day for Barack Hussein Obama, however.

 

Muslim Brotherhood infiltrates U.S. public schools?

Posted on by
2

by Aaron Klein at WND:

A flurry of news media reports last week highlighted a Harlem public elementary school that will become the first in New York to require students to study Arabic.

Entirely unreported is that the organization that co-created and funded the Arabic language program for the New York school, WND has found, maintains close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, while the group’s founder also started the Al Jazeera television network.

The Qatar Foundation International, or QFI, a nonprofit group financed by the government of Qatar, gave Harlem’s Hamilton Heights, a K-5 public school, a $250,000 grant to support the Arabic program for three years.

The school’s Arabic language program was reportedly developed by QFI and the the Global Language Project.

In addition to the Harlem school, WND found that QFI just awarded “Curriculum Grants” to seven U.S. schools and language organizations to “develop comprehensive and innovative curricula and teaching materials to be used in any Arabic language classroom.”

The schools include Bell High School, a Los Angeles public school, and Safford K-8 in Arizona’s Tucson Unified School District.

QFI, based in Washington, D.C., is the U.S. branch of the Qatar Foundation, founded in 1995 by Qatar’s ruling emir, Sheikha Hind bint Hamad Al Thani.

Thani is still the group’s vice-chairman, while his wife, Sheikha Moza bint Nasser, chairs the organization’s board.

Thani also launched Al Jazeera in 1996 and served as the television network’s chairman.

The Qatar foundation is close to the Muslim Brotherhood.

In January, it launched the Research Center for Islamic Legislation and Ethics under the guidance of Tariq Ramadan, who serves as the center’s director.

Ramadan is the grandson of the notorious founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hassan al Banna. Ramadan was banned from the U.S. until 2010 when the Obama administration issued him a visa to give a lecture at a New York school.

The Qatar Foundation, meanwhile, named several institutions after Yusuf al-Qaradawi, one of the top leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood. Many regard Qaradawi as the de facto spiritual leader of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood.

Read more

I don’t mind Arabic being taught in our schools because we need translators we can trust. Just not funded by foreign nationals that want to transform the US into an Islamic nation. The curriculum is going to have to be scrutinized very carefully.

UC Berkeley and the ‘Islamophobia’ Lobby

Posted on by
Reply

By Cinnamon Stillwell at Front Page:

The Islamophobia Research & Documentation Project (IRDP)—a program of the University of California, Berkeley’s Center for Race and Gender (CRG)—recently held its third annual conference, “Critical Discourses on Islamophobia: Symbols, Images, & Representations.” As in previous years, speaker after speaker decried an imaginary racist, imperialist, Orientalist Western juggernaut, while disregarding the very real predations of Islamism.

The first day of the conference brought in approximately eighty people at its peak, including a number of women in hijab (head scarf), typing furiously on laptops. Others sported keffiyehs and dreadlocks; a smattering of Arabic and French could be heard; and a scruffy, bearded fellow wandered around with what appeared to be a journal under his arm, Historicizing Anti-Semitism, that one suspects is not exactly kosher. It was just another day in Berkeley.

Hatem Bazian, IRDP director, Near Eastern studies senior lecturer, and conference convener started out by apologizing for the forty-minute delay in kicking off the event. He chalked it up to “Muslim Time”—a reference to the popular phrase among African-Americans, “Colored People’s Time”—and joked that “Swiss watches run forward, but Muslim watches run backward.” He thanked the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)—an Islamist organization posing as a defender of civil rights— for its participation in the conference (Zahra Billoo, CAIR Northern California Executive Director, spoke the next day) and for partnering with CRG to produce the 2011 report, “Same Hate, New Target: Islamophobia and Its Impact in the United States”—a report that falsely accuses a number of public figures of perpetrating “Islamophobia.” Bazian also thanked “individuals who send us hate mail” for demonstrating “the need for this conference,” about which, he claimed, there had been “considerable chatter,” including “wild” and “threatening” statements. All this “despite the fact that we have the first Muslim president,” he added, chuckling. This sarcastic reference to the American public’s perception of Barack Obama’s Muslim background would be repeated throughout the day as incontrovertible evidence of “Islamophobia.”

Tariq Ramadan, the controversial Oxford University professor of contemporary Islamic studies and grandson of Muslim Brotherhood founder Hasan al-Banna, demonstrated a capacity for what his critics have described as doublespeak with his keynote speech. Titled, “A Global Perspective on Constructing Muslim Otherness,” Ramadan’s talk was rife with contradiction. At one point, he acknowledged that the “victim mentality” is counterproductive for Muslims and other minorities:

People are relying on fear, mistrust, [and] nurturing the victim mentality. You can see this among Blacks, Latinos, [and] Muslims. Sometimes they play the victims. Victims are talking to each other. We are the victims of your colonization, legal colonization. It’s the way you accept the role given by the dominant: you become the victim.  

Yet pushing victimhood was the principal purpose of the conference. Moreover, Ramadan contributed to that narrative by implying that assimilation—the antidote to the balkanization caused by nurturing a victim mentality—was impossible in the U.S.:

At the end of the day, you might be a Muslim-American, Black, Latino, but not really. Us versus them. . . . After four generations, you are Muslim with an American background.

Ramadan admitted that something other than mere bigotry might be at the heart of what’s been disingenuously dubbed “Islamophobia”:

[S]ome of them are very sincere when it comes to being scared of the Muslim presence. . . . Try to understand the logic that is behind the whole thing . . . there is a great deal of mistrust towards our intentions as Muslims. We should go beyond the discussion of ‘we are discriminated’ towards a more comprehensive approach. . . . People can be genuinely scared; we have to face this.

He then added:

We have to get rid of this idea that the world is divided between the West and Islam. Instead of speaking about peace and living together, we respond with a discourse that is exactly the same.

But he went on to do just that, accusing both Republicans and Democrats of collusion—although he allowed that “some are less Islamophobic than others”—and claiming that “the people who are pushing it [are] the Tea Party and the Neocons.” Given that the Tea Party has focused exclusively on economic issues and that Neoconservatism is hardly a political force to be reckoned with of late, Ramadan’s rhetoric was hopelessly out of touch.

Ramadan eventually revealed why so many find him so dangerous by hinting at a belief in conspiracy theories surrounding the 9/11 attacks and the Mohamed Merah shootings in Toulouse, France, which resulted in the deaths of three soldiers, a rabbi, and three children at a Jewish school. Acknowledging that “there is a new anti-Semitism in France, which is coming from Arabs and Muslims,” he then accused “strong Zionist groups” of complicity for somehow “nurturing this kind of racism.” As he put it:

I know about 9/11, but I still have some questions about behind the scenes, the way it was used . . . I still have questions about what happened in France [Toulouse]. We should try to understand the alliances we find behind old enemies.

To imply that “Zionists”  are benefiting from atrocities against Jews and others goes beyond the realm of conspiracy theory into classical anti-Semitism.

Read the rest

Read “Islamophobia: Thought Crime of the Totalitarian Future” by David Horowitz and Robert Spencer