London’s Drive to Become the Sharia Finance Capitol of the World

shariah-uk-APBy Katie Gorka:

London is pushing to become the Western capitol for sharia finance in spite of the many potential ​dangers​.

This past November, London hosted the 2013 World Islamic Economic Forum. Speaking at that event, Prime Minister David Cameron said: “I want London to stand alongside Dubai and Kuala Lumpur as one of the great capitals of Islamic finance anywhere in the world.” In February, London hosted the Euromoney Islamic Finance Forum, where then-Financial Secretary to the Treasury Sajid Javid MP ​said​: “…almost every international Islamic contract will touch London – or a London-based firm – in some way.”

Now, London is preparing to become the first Western nation to issue an Islamic bond, or sukuk. The business potential is vast, with the shariah-complaint banking sector at an estimated $1.3 trillion and growing, according to the Global Islamic Financial Review. But the potential ​risks​ are manifold, and London should be asking itself whether the​ d​angers outweigh the profits​.

The principle behind sharia-compliant finance is that certain types of transactions are considered un-Islamic. Notably, interest is not allowed, and funds cannot be spent on certain industries or products such as pork, alcohol, tobacco, gambling, and pornography. Islamic financial tools therefore “purify” individual Muslims by helping them adhere to a more orthodox version of Islam. But it does more: like the wearing of the veil for women, it strengthens their identity as Muslims and weakens their ties to the non-Muslim community. Islamic finance thereby serves to create a parallel society, with a distinct ​cultural​ and religious identity, rather than expanding and enriching the existing society.

For the United Kingdom, which is already struggling with no-go zones, numerous counts of domestic Islamist terrorism, and growing tension between its Muslim and non-Muslim populations, one has to ask whether strengthening Muslim identity as something apart from British identity is not a recipe for disaster.

A second concern with sharia finance is that it has been a proven source of direct financial assistance to those fighting for Islam. In order to be deemed sharia compliant, a financial institution must pay zakat (tithing): they must contribute an amount that is typically cited as 2.5% of gross​, although it can also be more. According to the Qu’ran (9:60), recipients of zakat include the poor, the needy, those who serve the needy, and to free the slaves, but recipients also include “those who fight in the way of Allah”; “people engaged in Islamic military operations for whom no salary has been allotted in the army, or volunteers for jihad without remuneration.” (Reliance of the Traveler, The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law).

Within one year after the attacks of 9/11, the U.S. government blacklisted almost 180 Islamic banks, associations, and charities as financiers of terrorism. Moreover, recent studies have shown that the largest single source of funds for Islamic terrorism is zakat, which typically goes through the Islamic banking system. According to a 2002 report by Jean-Charles Brisard for the UN Security Council: “Al-Qaeda was able to receive between $300 million and $500 million” over a decade “through a web of charities and companies acting as fronts, with the notable use of Islamic banking institutions.”

Read more at Breitbart

Katie Gorka ​is the President of the Council for Global Security.​

Taqiyya about Taqiyya

raqBy Raymond Ibrahim:

I was recently involved in an interesting exercise—examining taqiyya about taqiyya—and believe readers might profit from the same exercise, as it exposes all the subtle apologetics made in defense of the Islamic doctrine, which permits Muslims to lie to non-Muslims, or “infidels.”

Context: Khurrum Awan, a lawyer, is suing Ezra Levant, a Canadian media personality and author, for defamation and $100,000.  Back in 2009 and on his own website, Levant had accused Awan of taqiyya in the context of Awan’s and the Canadian Islamic Congress’ earlier attempts to sue Mark Steyn.

For more on Levant’s court case, go to www.StandWithEzra.ca.

On behalf of Awan, Mohammad Fadel—professor of Islamic Law at the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Law—provided an expert report to the court on the nature of taqiyya, the significance of which he portrayed as “a staple of right-wing Islamophobia in North America.”

In response, Levant asked me (back in 2013) to write an expert report on taqiyya, including by responding to Fadel’s findings.

I did.  And it had the desired effect.  As Levant put it in an email to me:

It was an outstanding report, very authoritative and persuasive. Of course, we don’t know what the plaintiff’s [Awan’s] private thoughts about it were, but we do know that after receiving the report, he decided to cancel calling his own expert witness [Dr. Fadel]—who happens to be a Muslim Brotherhood sympathizer. After reading your rebuttal, he decided he would rather not engage in that debate.

My expert report follows.  In it, I quote relevant portions of Fadel’s expert report (which can be read in its entirety here).  Most intriguing about the professor’s report is that it’s a perfect example of taqiyya about taqiyya.  By presenting partial truths throughout the report, Fadel appears to have even employed taqiyya’s more liberal sister, tawriya.

Accordingly, readers interested in learning more about the role of deception in Islam—and how to respond to those trying to dismiss it as an “Islamophobic fantasy”—are encouraged to read on.

Raymond Ibrahim’s Expert Report on Taqiyya

Instructions: I have been asked to assess a report concerning the doctrine of taqiyya in Islam, written by one Mohammad Fadel; and, if I disagreed with any parts of it, to explain why—objectively, neutrally, and in a non-partisan manner.  My findings follow.

 Introduction

The Islamic doctrine of taqiyya permits Muslims to actively deceive non-Muslims—above and beyond the context of “self-preservation,” as is commonly believed.

One of the few books exclusively devoted to the subject, At-Taqiyya fi’l-Islam (“Taqiyya in Islam”) make this unequivocally clear. Written (in Arabic) by Dr. Sami Mukaram, a former Islamic studies professor at the American University of Beirut and author of some twenty-five books on Islam, the book demonstrates the ubiquity and broad applicability of taqiyya in its opening pages:

Taqiyya is of fundamental importance in Islam. Practically every Islamic sect agrees to it and practices it … We can go so far as to say that the practice of taqiyya is mainstream in Islam, and that those few sects not practicing it diverge from the mainstream … Taqiyya is very prevalent in Islamic politics, especially in the modern era.[1]

The following report is written as a response to Mohammed Fadel’s report (henceforth referred to as MFR) which deals with the topic of taqiyya and its place and usage in Islamic jurisprudence.   Because MFR is written in a premises-conclusion format, the following report will follow MFR’s numbering schemata, pointing out which premises are agreeable and which are not—offering correctives to these latter resulting in an antithetical conclusion.

Numbers/Premises of MFR in Order:

1-3: Preliminary statements.

4: Agreed.

5:  Agreed, with the following caveat:  To many Muslims, jihad, that is, armed struggle against the non-Muslim, is the informal sixth pillar.   Islam’s prophet Muhammad said that “standing in the ranks of battle [jihad] is better than standing (in prayer) for sixty years,”[2] even though prayer is one of the Five Pillars, and he ranked jihad as the “second best deed” after belief in Allah as the only god and he himself, Muhammad, as his prophet, the shehada, or very First Pillar of Islam.[3]

All this indicates jihad’s importance in Islam—and thus importance to this case, since, as shall be seen, taqiyya is especially permissible in the context of jihad or struggle to empower Islam and/or Muslims over non-Muslims.

6: Agreed.  Qiyas, or analogical reasoning, the practice of finding antecedents in the teachings of the two revelatory sources (Qur’an and Hadith) and rationalizing their applicability to modern phenomena, also belongs to usul al-fiqh, or Islam’s roots of jurisprudence.  It gives more elasticity to Islam’s rules (a major theme throughout this report).  Qiyas, for example, is the way al-Qaeda and other jihadi organizations justify suicide attacks: although killing oneself is clearly forbidden in Islam, in the context of jihad—in the context of trying to empower Islam—suicide attacks are rationalized as legitimate forms of stealth warfare, since those giving their lives are not doing so out of despair but rather for Islam (as in Qur’an 9:111).[4]

7-19: Generally agreed (or indifferent to: some information in these numbers is not necessarily germane to the issue at hand and did not warrant confirmation).

20:  “Normative Islamic doctrine places strong emphasis on the obligation to speak the truth.”

This is the first of many statements/premises that are only partially true.

For starters, Islamic jurisprudence separates humanity into classes.  The rules concerning the relationship between a Muslim and a fellow Muslim differ from the rules concerning the relationship between a Muslim and a non-Muslim.

First there is the umma—the “Islamic nation,” that is, all Muslims of the earth, irrespective of national, racial, or linguistic barriers.  Many of the Qur’an’s and Hadith’s teachings that appear laudable and fair are in fact teachings that apply only to fellow Muslims.

For example, although the Qur’an’s calls for Muslims to give charity (zakat) appear to suggest that Muslims may give charity to all humans—in fact, normative Islamic teaching is clear that Muslim charity (zakat) can only be given to fellow Muslims, never to non-Muslims.[5]

As for legal relations between Muslims and non-Muslims—or kuffar, the “infidels” (kafir, singular)—within the Islamic world, these fall into two main categories: first, the harbi, that is, the non-Muslim who does not reside in the Islamic world; if at any time a Muslim comes across him in the Muslim world, according to classic Islamic doctrine, he is free to attack, enslave, and/or kill him (the exception is if he is musta’min—given a formal permit by an Islamic authority to be on Muslim territory, such as the case of the many foreigners working in the Arabian Peninsula).[6]

Second is the dhimmi, the non-Muslim who lives under Muslim domination (for example, all the indigenous Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, Berbers, etc. whose lands were conquered by Muslims beginning in the 7th century).   By today’s standards, the rules governing the dhimmi, most of which are based on the so-called “Conditions of Omar” (sometimes the “Pact of Omar”) are openly discriminatory and include things such as commanding non-Muslims to give up their seats whenever a Muslim wants it.[7]

It is, then, in this divisive context that one must approach the Qur’an, keeping in mind that most of the verses discussing human relations are discussing intra-relations between Muslims, not Muslims and non-Muslims.  For examples of the latter, see Qur’an 9:5, 9:29, 5:17, and 5:73 for typical verses that discuss relations between Muslims and non-Muslims, verses which have further abrogated the earlier, more tolerant ones. [8]

As for the Qur’an verses listed in MFR 20—which are meant to support the statement that “Normative Islamic doctrine places strong emphasis on the obligation to speak the truth,” a close reading, supported by mainstream Islamic exegeses, demonstrates that the true function of those verses is to portray true believers (Muslims) and Islam’s prophets as the epitome of honesty and sincerity.  Significantly, none of the verses mentioned in MFR 20 actually exhort Muslims to be honest and truthful, including to fellow Muslims, in the same vein as, for example, unequivocal statements such as Do not lie to one another” (Colossians 3:9) and “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor” (Exodus 20:16).

The fact is, other Islamic teachings and caveats have permitted Muslims to deceive even fellow Muslims.  For example, the doctrine of tawriya allows Muslims to lie in virtually all circumstances provided that the lie is articulated in a way that it is technically true.

The authoritative Hans Wehr Arabic-English Dictionary defines tawriya as, “hiding, concealment; dissemblance, dissimulation, hypocrisy; equivocation, ambiguity, double-entendre, allusion.” Conjugates of the trilateral root of the word, w-r-y, appear in the Quran in the context of hiding or concealing something (e.g., 5:31, 7:26).

As a doctrine, “double-entendre” best describes tawriya’s function. According to past and present Muslim scholars (several documented below), tawriya is when a speaker/writer asserts something that means one thing to the listener/reader, though the speaker/writer means something else, and his words technically support this alternate meaning.

For example, if someone declares “I don’t have a penny in my pocket,” most listeners will assume the speaker has no money on him—though he might have dollar bills, just literally no pennies.

This is legitimate according to Islamic law, or shari‘a—the body of legal rulings that defines how a Muslim should behave in all circumstances—and does not constitute “lying.”

In a fatwa, or Islamic decree, popular Sheikh Muhammad Salih al-Munajid asserts that, “Tawriya is permissible if it is necessary or serves a shari‘a interest.”  As mentioned, empowering Islam is one of the highest shari‘a interests [9] (hence why jihad, so lauded by Islam’s prophet as aforementioned, is sometimes seen as the “sixth pillar”).

Read more at Front Page

Obama’s America: Safe Haven for Terrorists

Obamas-Friends2By Rachel Molschky:

Certain countries harbor criminals and are known to provide safety to those the rest of us consider less savory. Argentina became a safe haven to Nazis, and many countries in the Middle East harbor terrorists, which is no surprise being that some of these governments themselves are terrorist organizations. Now Obama has turned American into a safe haven for Muslim terrorists.

So intent on increasing Muslim immigration, the Obama Administration has eased restrictions on asylum seekers with terrorist ties. Apparently, if their terrorism is “minimal” it’s ok, and they will still be welcome in America.

“The change, approved by Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson and Secretary of State John Kerry, was announced Wednesday in the Federal Register. It would allow some individuals who provided ‘limited material support’ to terror groups to be considered for entry into the U.S.”

In the same old, same old victimizing political correctness, those endorsing the change call the previous security measures unfair to deserving people seeking asylum. But if they aided and abetted terrorists, how can they be deserving?

Compare the situation to a regular murder case. In most states, there is a felony murder rule, which allows the police to arrest on murder charges all those involved in a premeditated commission of a felony which resulted in murder. For example, if five people came up with a plan to rob someone, but one of them kills the robbery victim, even if the other four protested this murder, all five can be arrested  on murder charges. This includes everyone involved, even people who played minor roles in the robbery. By law, they are all murderers. And rightly so. Laws like this act as deterrents. Maybe you’ll think twice before partaking in felony crimes if the consequences could ruin the rest of your life.

Take away the punishment and take away the deterrent. The Obama Administration is basically saying, “if you’re kind of a terrorist, no problem.” A “little bit of terror” is not enough to turn you away. Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., was disappointed with the changes. “We need to tighten security standards for asylum, not relax them even further,” he said.

This loosening of restrictions means that discretion will be used for each case, but can we trust someone’s opinion? Whether or not the applicant is a threat will be debatable, and while it is better to err on the side of caution, this change will allow for mistakes to be made and is leaving the United States vulnerable.

In the past, as the US government welcomed more and more Muslim refugees, the FBI would be forced to worked doubly hard in order to keep track of those who posed a threat. But our national security is changing in this regard as well. Attorney General Eric Holder, in his quest to make everything equal and eliminate discrimination, has deemed such activity wrongful. The Justice Department is broadening its definition of racial profiling “to prohibit federal agents from considering religion, national origin, gender and sexual orientation in their investigations,”according to a New York Times article.

Civil rights groups say that Muslims are being unfairly targeted. While details of this change are still lacking, it is unclear whether or not this will affect cases of national security. However, it may be open to interpretation, and we may see a future case taken to court based on “discrimination,” because after all, “discriminating” against a terrorist because he is Muslim is more important than protecting our nation and innocent lives which could be lost.

Political correctness. Again. Without question, unjust discrimination is wrong, but when the world is under the constant threat of Islamic terrorism which is based on religion, whether Eric Holder likes it or not, religion is a factor.

Read more at Cherson and Molschky

Algerian Mosque Terror Financing Draws Scrutiny

Tarawih___Hamza_324936347by IPT News:

 

Halal: A Taste of Terror

halal-meat-460By :

“Beware! Halal food funds terrorists.” Stickers with this slogan were sold in July by a candidate of the Australian political party One Nation, and condemned by the country’s Multicultural Affairs Minister Glen Elmes as “offensive, grotesque and designed to inflame hatred.” He added: “People are encouraged to put the stickers on food products in supermarkets, which isn’t just racial discrimination, it’s also vandalism.”

What the sticker says, though, is apparently taking place in the USA and Canada where Campbell’s Soup and other companies have paid the Hamas-linked Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) for their halal certification, in France, where it is claimed that 60% of halal food is controlled by organizations belonging to the Muslim Brotherhood and the so-called “halal tax” is the organization’s main source of funding. In the UK, major supermarket chain Morrisons is not only indirectly but even directly giving money to the Islamic National Zakat Foundation. I’ll explain what that is about in a minute.

“Ritual slaughter” is the slaughter of animals for food following religious prescriptions. The Muslim method to produce halal (“lawful” or “permissible”) meat consists of cutting fully conscious animals’ throat while the name of Allah is uttered and letting them bleed to death. The Jewish method of producing kosher meat shares with the Muslim one the fact that the animal is not stunned before being killed.

Laws of Western countries generally require that animals are stunned to render them unconscious before slaughter, but allow exceptions for both Jewish and Muslim ritual slaughter.

Government advisory bodies, like the Farm Animal Welfare Council and the British Veterinary Association in the UK, have produced reports and made declarations saying that ritual slaughter causes ”intolerable cruelty” and have repeatedly demanded that it be banned.

The Muslim Council of Britain claims that most halal meat comes from stunned animals, but in reality a very low voltage is used in their electrocution, resulting in inadequate stunning.

This makes it objectionable to most non-Muslims on animal welfare grounds. Christians and others – Sikhs in Britain currently have an anti-halal petition – also consider the utterance of Allah’s name at the moment of slaughter as idolatry.

And a major concern is that halal meat is just no longer for Muslim consumption, but is sold to “infidels” in ever greater quantity the world over.

To get an idea of the extent of this phenomenon, one of the most influential halal certification bodies, the Halal Food Authority, now estimates that a staggering 25% of the entire UK meat market is halal. But Muslims are about 5% of the UK population, therefore there is as much as 5 times more halal meat than Muslims.

In Britain halal meat is routinely served and sold to non-Muslims who don’t even know that they’re eating it, let alone want to do so. Schools, hospitals, hundreds of restaurants and pubs, sporting venues like Wembley football stadium and Ascot race course, all the main supermarkets chains – none excluded – fast-food and pizza chains have been drawn into what commercially must look like a win-win situation for them: Muslims complain and demand halal, non-Muslims don’t complain, adapt and tolerate. Especially if they’re not informed and food is not properly labelled.

In dhimmi Britain, when pork or other non-halal food is accidentally discovered in school menus, as recently happened,  it causes a fervor, hits headlines, the food is immediately removed and the responsible sacked, but it’s nearly impossible to have halal meat – which non-Muslims don’t want – removed from schools or at least not served to unbelievers. In an increasing number of schools halal is the only meat served. Is the only way to ban halal food in schools to “contaminate” it with pork, as someone suggested?

What’s happening with halal is that we are experiencing for the first time in the West Islamization on a large scale. Great numbers of people are forced to live according to Sharia law whether they like it or not, which is the essence of Islam and its supremacist nature.

Read more at Front Page

Jacksonville City Council Could “Kill the Human Rights Controversy”

City_council_meeting_pic-630x286by Randy McDaniels:

Mayor Alvin Brown’s nomination of Parvez Ahmed, former National Chairman of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) for a second term on the Human Rights Commission has the City Council and its citizens divided on the issue.

Parvez Ahmed

Parvez Ahmed

The 2010 Jacksonville City Council had an opportunity to “Kill the Controversy” surrounding Parvez Ahmed dead in its tracks.  That Council received Information from Former Muslims United, which if properly acted upon would have answered any question about the suitability of Parvez Ahmed to sit on a Human Rights body and done so in a manner which would have reasonably appealed to the sensibilities of those on both sides of this nomination.

In 2009, Former Muslims United (FMU) sent a “Pledge for Religious Freedom” to approximately (46) Florida Mosques, Islamic Centers, and other recognized Islamic leaders to include Parvez Ahmed.  The letter cites authoritative Islamic Law or SHARIA from (8) renowned sources to include (3) Islamic legal bodies within North America, and all call for capital punishment for those who commit apostasy or treason by leaving the nation of Islam.

Note:  Since Sharia governs all aspects of the nation of Islam, it is not really a religious legal code, but in fact a political system.  Political Islam or Sharia, governs not only religion, but all aspects of Islamic life to include social, economic, political, military, and legal matters…many of which address those outside the faith of Islam irrespective of their personal rights or beliefs.

The full “Pledge for Religious Freedom” which can be viewed at the bottom of this article, finishes with a request for leaders in the Islamic community to sign a pledge in affirmation of basic Human Rights:

To support the civil rights of former Muslims, also known as apostates from Islam, I sign “The Muslim Pledge for Religious Freedom and Safety from Harm for Former Muslims”:

I renounce, repudiate and oppose any physical intimidation, or worldly and corporal punishment, of apostates from Islam, in whatever way that punishment may be determined or carried out by myself or any other Muslim including the family of the apostate, community, Mosque leaders, Shariah court or judge, and Muslim government or regime.

 _______________________________

Signed By

 The authoritative Islamic laws (Sharia) cited, not only violate the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness cherished by all Americans who recognize the Constitution as the supreme law of the land, but they also violate the right to Freedom of Religion guaranteed under 1st  Amendment.

More problematic than his refusal to sign the “Pledge of Religious Freedom” is the fact CAIR members whom Parvez Ahmed worked with for years, held and currently hold leadership positions on leading Islamic legal bodies in North America, such as the Fiqh Council of North America (FCNA) and the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), which have placed their seal of approval on the “Reliance of the Traveller”, the only official English/Arabic Translation of SHARIA, which sanctions the killing of apostates and is sourced in the Pledge.

Additionally, CAIR’s Co-founder Nihad Awad, and CAIR National Board Members Muzzamil Siddiqi and Jamal Badawi sit on the Shura Council of North America, which is tasked with overseeing the implementation of Sharia law and guiding the work of the Muslim Brotherhood inside the United States.  CAIR boldly honored the founder of (IIIT) Jamal Barzinji with a lifetime achievement award in September of 2012, which suggest CAIR continues to support Sharia and Muslim Brotherhood.

The Shura concept of democracy is quite different than western concepts of democracy in that a literal translation of “rule of the people” cannot occur within Islam, because all sovereignty belongs to ALLAH, meaning Sharia not the U.S. Constitution shall be the Supreme Law of the Land.

This view is also supported by leading 20th century Muslim thinkers like Sayyid Qutb (Shepard 1996:110, Hoffmann 2007:297) and Abu al-Ala al-Mawdudi (1969:215). They base their argument on Quranic verses 6:57, 12:40, and 12:67, all of which contain the phrase “in al-hukm illā li-llāh” meaning that the decision or power is God’s alone (Fatwa no. 98134 (n.d.) at IslamQA.com).

An example, which goes to the heart of why it is paramount to determine the mindset of Parvez Ahmed is (Fatwa no. 22239 (n.d.) at IslamQA.com.), which states that legislative systems which rule on matters already decided by divine intervention – such as abolishing polygamy or outlawing capital punishment – “go against the laws of the Creator” and this “constitutes disbelief (kufr)”.  Those who issue Fatwa’s, look to authoritative Islamic legal text such as the “Reliance of the Traveller” in order to support their legal opinions.

By signing a document which directly renounces Sharia or “Goes against the laws of the Creator” a Sharia Adherent Muslim would render himself an enemy of the Islamic State (Apostate) unless he was under threat of death or extreme duress, at such times it is permissible deceive and/or lie even about such grave matters as religous belief, which is normally forbidden.

Holy Deception (Taqiyya) and Permissible lying are basic tenants of the Islamic legal and religious code, which make lying and deception obligatory on all Muslims if the action is obligatory.  The Hijrah (migration) to settle enemy lands for eventual Islamic conquest and Jihad – Islamic warfare against non-Muslim to establish the religion are obligatory actions.  Jihad can take many forms to include information warfare (propaganda, dawah/outreach, as well as financial warfare (Sharia Compliant Finance (SCF)), however Jihad Qital or violent Jihad is the most revered.

Note:  CAIR advertises they are Zakat eligible on their website.  Meaning, CAIR can collect money for the (8) categories of Islamic giving which includes JIHAD.  However, CAIR boast all of their giving goes for Zakat Fi-Sabilillah or entirely for the purpose of Jihad and has since Parvez Ahmed held the position of National Chairman.

The specific language crafted in the “Pledge for Religious Freedom” strips the ability a political Islamist to wordsmith in order to give a misleading impression of tolerance and moderation where such moderation may not truly exist.

For example:  Under Islamic Legal definitions, non-Muslims are sub-human and guilty of sin (not Innocent) since they are not Muslim.  Terrorism is understood as the UNJUST killing of a Muslim only (The killing of an apostate, homosexual, and Kufr are all justified).

In light of these Islamic Understandings, consider the following statement:

“In my religion we are forbidden from killing any innocent human being and I unequivocally denounce terrorism in any form it may take.”

If this statement was made by a Sharia adherent Muslim, did it violate any tenants of Islamic law?  Understanding Sharia, does this statement in anyway condemn the killing of non-Muslims, homosexuals, or apostates which are contrary to western notions of basic Human Rights?  The answer to both of these questions is no and this statment is in no way moderate.

The vast majority of Jacksonville residents have never heard an honest discussion regarding the numerous concerns surrounding this appointment.  Unfortunately, what they have seen is members of the Council, the Florida Times Union, NAACP, ACLU and even the local Democrat Party jump on the race bait bandwagon with accusations of fear mongering, Islamophobia and outright Racism.

Those opposed to this appointment have cited the fact CAIR was labeled a Co-conspirator in the largest successfully prosecuted terrorism finance trial in U.S. history (US vs. HLF, 2008), as well as evidence which clearly demonstrates the organization which Parvez Ahmed held a leadership position in for over (10) years was created to support HAMAS with funds, media and manpower.

In addition, Parvez Ahmed has gone on record, making direct statements in support of convicted terrorist, terrorist groups HAMAS and Hezbollah, as well as writing numerous articles which appear to support the stated goals of the Muslim Brotherhood in furtherance of their “Civilization Jihad” inside America to include a recent article which suggested criminalizing free speech if it offends Islam, the Prophet Muhammad, or Muslims in accordance with Sharia Slander Law which are being pushed by the OIC at the U.N. via resolution 16/18.

In a rational world, these facts would be more than enough to disqualify this nomination and those courageous councilmen and women who changed their position based on the facts should not have been crucified in the media but commended.

With “Honor Killings” on the rise and a segment of the American population living in fear of persecution and threat death for nothing more than trying to exercise their 1st Amendment rights, the City Council would be derelict in their duty if they did not utilize ever tool available to ensure the Constitutional freedoms of every citizen are protected.

The “Pledge for Religious Freedom” provides an excellent tool to “KILL the Controversy” surrounding Parvez Ahmed’s suitability to hold a seat on a Human Rights Commission and ensue the rights of former Muslims are protected. 

The real question is will City Council take advantage of this Freedom Document?

Read more at The Watchdog Wire

 

Money Jihad: How Islamists Finance Their Operations

by: Ryan Mauro

The author of the Money Jihad blogwishes to remain anonymous. The daily blog documents how Islamists finance their operations. The author previously served in military-intelligence and has been blogging about terrorism financing for three years.

The following is RadicalIslam.or’s Security Analyst Ryan Mauro’s interview with the author of the Money Jihad blog about how the Islamist terrorism continues to be lavishly funded 11 years after the attacks of September 11, 2001.

Ryan Mauro: What legal loopholes are the Islamists using to finance their operations worldwide?

Money Jihad: Saudi Arabia’s approach to terror finance is a giant loophole in and of itself.  The Islamic zakat tax, what some call “Islamic charity,” is a massive source of jihadist revenues.  The Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency is supposed to approve charitable zakat transfers overseas, but it’s a fig leaf; the Saudis still fund the spread of radical Wahhabism abroad.  Also, it took Saudi Arabia’s Senior Ulema Council nine years after 9/11 to criminalize the financing of terrorism.  Whenever the Council comments on terror finance, it vigorously defends zakat in the same breath.  The Council won’t even define terrorism to include suicide bomb attacks against Israel.

In the U.S., we need a totally different approach to regulating hawala, the traditional Islamic system money transfer system that has helped fund terrorists.  But on balance I would say that most of the terror finance shortcomings in the West involve inadequate enforcement of existing laws rather than a lack of laws.

Ryan Mauro: What laws aren’t being enforced and why?

Money Jihad:  First, the Patriot Act prohibits providing material support to terrorism such as transferring money to Hamas.  The Holy Land Foundation (HLF) trial revealed that Islamic organizations such as the North American Islamic Trust and the Islamic Society of North America worked closely with HLF.  The Bush administration never intended HLF to be their final prosecution, but they ran out of time to pursue HLF’s associates.  Especially now that HLF’s final appeal was rejected by the Supreme Court, this would be a great time to enforce the material support provisions of the Patriot Act against HLF’s unindicted co-conspirators.

Second, the Foreign Agents Registration Act isn’t being enforced with respect to CAIR which engages in political activities in the U.S. but is funded from abroad.

Third, the nonprofit provisions of the Internal Revenue code are being abused by Islamic organizations that claim to be charities but are actually engaged in business activities.  For example, Islamic Food and Nutrition Council of America (IFANCA) is a certifier of halal foods.  It gets most of its revenues from inspecting food manufacturers that seek a halal certification label, but IFANCA claims tax-exempt status on the false basis of receiving revenues from charitable donations and grants, which is discredited by a simple review of their tax forms.  Canada does a better job than the U.S. of stripping bogus charity fronts of their tax-exempt status.

Fourth, Bank Secrecy Act and Treasury regulations require money services businesses, including hawala dealers, to register their business with the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. One study showed that about 85 percent of hawala businesses simply ignore the requirement.

As to why these laws aren’t being enforced, I think it’s political.

Ryan Mauro: What methods are the Islamists using today to raise money, besides soliciting wealthy donors?

Money Jihad: Well, it’s not just about zakat from wealthy donors.  Folks like Amina Farah Ali in Minnesota, Shabaaz Hussain in London, and Irfan Naseer in Birmingham have fundraised for relatively small donations from individual Muslims to support jihad overseas.  A few thousand dollars from the West goes a long way to fund a holy warrior on the ground in Somalia.

But apart from zakat donations, there are a whole host of other Islamic taxes that receive less attention but are huge revenue stream for jihad.  Western reporters call it extortion, but the mujahideen don’t look at it that way.

Take for example two terrorist organizations with a ground game:  Al-Shabaab and the Taliban.  They have fighters on the ground and control definite territory.  Organizations like that rely to a great extent on levying Islamic taxes on the people under their jurisdiction.  The Taliban still gets money from ushr, the Islamic tax on harvests, which includes poppy yields.  Al Shabaab imposes harbor taxes, checkpoint taxes (a practice from the early days of Islam up through Ottoman times), and a zakat on the lucrative Somali charcoal trade.

Ransoms, which are also permitted against infidels by the Koran, are a major revenue source for organizations like AQIM and Abu Sayyaf.  For Hezbollah, the West focuses on their drug money, but they get a lot of money from khums, the Shia Muslim tax on individual profit.

Counterfeiting, Sharia finance, street crimes, welfare fraud — those are all being used as well in different parts of the world to fund terrorism, individual Islamists or both.

Read more at Radical Islam

Ryan Mauro is RadicalIslam.org’s National Security Analyst and a fellow with the Clarion Fund. He is the founder of WorldThreats.com and is frequently interviewed on Fox News.

Money Jihad – Seven ways to stop funding terror

Money Jihad:

Money Jihad has previously proposed methods to limit zakat and hawala—two major mechanisms for funding terror.  Here’s a more comprehensive set of our recommendations that would reduce terrorist financing overall:

  1. Drill, baby, drill.  The U.S. should expand offshore oil drilling, open federal lands for drilling, ease its permitting process for new refineries, encourage hydraulic fracturing methods that tap previously inaccessible energy sources underground, and approve the Keystone XL pipeline.  Increasing domestic U.S. and Western Hemisphere energy production will reduce reliance on Persian Gulf oil supplies and thereby minimize the profits reaped by hostile, foreign regimes that sponsor terror.
  2. Eliminate foreign aid to Pakistan.  Pakistan uses its ISI spy service to fund the Taliban, the Haqqani network, and Lashkar-e-Taiba.  Continuing to waste money on Pakistan is not only wasteful when we can least afford it, but it is suicidal.
  3. Study the true enemy and threat.  Among the most important concepts for the Western public to understand are:

    If we fail to acknowledge Islam as the animating force behind terror finance, we’ll get confused and aim at the wrong targets.  For example, we’ve spent billions of dollars complying with extensive bureaucratic requirements such as currency reports that have yielded minimal results.

  4. Launch a new offensive against Muslim American charities and entities that fund terrorism.  Pick a few of the highest profile ones and make an example of them by prosecuting their leaders and dressing them in orange jumpsuits.  Prosecute Islamic Relief USA under the laws against providing material support for terrorism.  Prosecute the Council on American-Islamic Relations under the Foreign Agents Registration Act.  Strip the halal food certifier IFANCA and the mosque deed financier North American Islamic Trust of their tax-exempt status.
  5. Tax hawala. Terrorists use the traditional Islamic money transfer system known as hawala to exchange money without being monitored.  Hawala dealers in the U.S. are required to register with FinCEN, a financial regulator, but about 85 percent of hawaladars ignore the requirement.  Imposing a simple one percent tax on hawala remittances would help put hawala under the jurisdiction of tax authorities rather than financial regulators who focus more attention on large banks than on small money services businesses.  A one percent tax would be a mild, positive step in beginning to track the transactions to countries that intend us harm.
  6. Designate ISI and Muslim World League as terrorist entities.  Pakistan funds jihadists through its ISI intelligence agency.  Saudi Arabia funds Hamas, Al Qaeda, and other Wahhabi movements abroad through the Muslim World League (MWL) which is comprised of eight subdivisions including the notorious International Islamic Relief Organization and the World Assembly for Muslim Youth.  The U.S. should declare the ISI and MWL to be foreign terrorist organizations in the same fashion that the Iran Revolutionary Guard Corps has been designated.
  7. Stop paying ransoms to jihadists.  Enforce U.N. Resolution 1904 which prohibits paying ransoms to terrorists or broker a new treaty banning the payment by governments or insurance companies of ransoms to specified terrorist groups.  Al Qaeda affiliates, the Taliban, Abu Sayyaf other jihadist organizations have made millions of dollars in the kidnap-for-ransom business.  Discourage recreational travel by Westerners to locations such as Somalia, Yemen, and the southern Philippines.

Any one of these proposals alone could help reduce terrorist revenues by hundreds of millions of dollars.

Other analysts have proposed improving and standardizing financial regulations, adopting conditions-based aid rather than open-ended foreign aid through the use of millennium challenge accounts, encouraging divestment and terror-free investing, promoting alternative energy sources, enacting harsher sanctions against Iran, a putting a greater focus on the prosecution of white collar financial crimes.

Ultimately, you have to examine the biggest sources of revenue for jihad, then look at what actions would be likeliest to reduce those revenue streams.

Pew Research Institute Releases Telling Survey of World’s Muslims

By Clare Lopez

Recent results of the Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion and Public Life multi-year survey of beliefs and practices by the world’s Muslims that were published 8 August 2012 are remarkable in a number of respects. First of all, the broad scope of the project—based on 38,000 face-to-face interviews conducted with Muslims in 39 different countries and territories—ensured a wide range of opinions from a diverse sampling of Muslim communities.

The results, however, show a high level of agreement about one of the most debated issues concerning Islam: Whether Muslims believe Islamic teaching is subject to various “interpretations” or only one. As Islamic teaching is derived from the Qur’an, the Sira, and the ahadith (which together are the main sources for Sharia, or Islamic law), in essence this was a question about Muslim beliefs about the fundamentals of their faith.

According to the Pew survey results, a majority (more than 50%) of Muslims in 32 of 39 countries believes that “There is only one true way to interpret the teachings of my religion.”

The highest levels of agreement with that statement were found in places perhaps not expected to score at or above the 75% mark: Bosnia-Herzegovina (in the heart of Europe) and Tajikistan (in Central Asia). Three of the most populous Muslim countries—Indonesia, Malaysia, and Pakistan—all scored above 70% agreement on the oneness of Islamic doctrine, a level of orthodoxy that tracks well with Pakistan’s jihadist image, but may come as a jolt to those who still think that Islam’s East Asian strongholds are somehow more willing to diverge from core Islamic doctrine than their Middle Eastern co-religionists.

In fact, Indonesian Muslims’ 72% level of agreement that there is “only one true way to interpret” Islam places them just a few points behind Egypt and Jordan, with 78% and 76%, respectively. It was the Sub-Saharan African Muslims who posted the strongest display of Sharia adherence, however: All 16 survey countries from Mali and Nigeria in West Africa to Ethiopia, Kenya, Mozambique and Tanzania in the east scored above the 50% mark of agreement on the “one true” interpretation question.

Of course, Tawhid, meaning the oneness of Allah, the oneness of belief, and the oneness of the Muslim ummah, is a core identifying concept of Islam that would not come as a surprise to those who have studied authoritative Islamic doctrine.

The new Pew survey was conducted among global Muslims, but did not include interviews of American Muslims. The Institute, however, has conducted earlier, similar surveys among U.S. Muslims, specifically in 2007 and 2011.

The August 2011 “Muslim Americans: No Signs of Growth in Alienation or Support for Extremism” report stands out for the mind-boggling statistic that shows only 26% of all Muslims in America see themselves as American first, while nearly double that number (49%) see themselves as Muslim first and American second. An additional 18% see themselves as both American and Muslim equally.

There’s another wake-up call in the August 2011 U.S. survey, where Pew asked essentially the same question about American Muslims’ views on the “ways to interpret the teachings of Islam” as in the 2012 global survey. By a 57% to 37% margin, American Muslims said there was more than one way.

Of the minority (37%) who thought there was only one way to interpret Islamic teaching, however, native U.S.-born Muslims were more likely to believe there was only one way to interpret Islam than the foreign-born immigrant Muslims! Put another way, native-born American citizen Muslims are far more likely to be rigid about their Islamic faith than Muslim immigrants—by a whopping 46% to 31% margin.

This finding means that the Salafist indoctrination efforts of Muslim Brotherhood-dominated madrassas, mosques and Islamic Centers across the U.S. are successful at turning out home-grown, Sharia-adherent Muslims. Additionally, it correlates well with the results of the Summer 2011 Middle East Quarterly “Mapping Sharia” study by Mordechai Kedar and David Yerushalmi, which found that teaching at U.S. mosques is overwhelmingly (80%) of the hard core Salafi variety that advocates violence.

Read more at Radical Islam

Clare Lopez is a senior fellow at RadicalIslam.org and a strategic policy and intelligence expert with a focus on the Middle East, national defense and counterterrorism. Lopez began her career as an operations officer with the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

 

 

Red to Green, the Muslim Brotherhood in America

Source: Patriots Duty

“I will stand with the Muslim should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.” From, Audacity of Hope by Barrack Hussein Obama

Barack Obama flew 7000 miles at the cost of $170,000.00 per flight hour under the cloak of secrecy, surprise and darkness for a formal signing of a ten year Karzai agreement between the United States and Afghanistan. The contents of this agreement have not been released or approved as a treaty by the White House or the State Department; however it does allegedly stop drone strikes and demands the Taliban’s promise of peace.

At the Baghram Air Base the stage was set and the curtain rose at 4:30 a.m. with no troops or press pool invited to the vaudeville act where the Commander in Chief announced the final war stages of the war strategy and the exit plan in Afghanistan to the entire globe, something no other Commander in Chief or theater General has ever previously broadcasted in American history. Within minutes of the execution of this financial and military contract, complete with signatures hitting the airwaves, Kabul was struck by an exchange of gun-fire, suicide bombers and car bombs in retaliation for the coalition partnership deal. The early ‘sitrep’ told us there were 2 dead and 16 wounded, when an updated ‘sitrep’ revealed deeper collateral damage of our own U.S. forces of 1 EOD, 3 Special Forces were killed in action and 1 SEAL was wounded were added to the casualty and wounded list.

Barack Obama on a return flight to the United States, never looked back at the destruction in his wake from the boasting political event to laud his self proclaimed achievement where the ‘War on Terror’ is over dreamed-up only by his administration handlers as Osama bin Ladin was the catalystic springboard to Obama’s spouting success. Bin Ladin’s death was the crowning achievement, aired in political ads, campaign speeches and press releases. Yet, what is the next ‘forward’ step to mounting a larger goal of peace for ten years ahead and who or what stands to receive the final trophy? The supreme endgame has become clear and defined; the trophy is flying the flag of Islam over the White House. Here at home, there is a palpable and obscure movement where red has replaced green. Communism is no longer the insurgent, now it is the green menace, known as Islam. In the United States, emulating the Cold War anti-American objective, green now represents a flood of Sharia complaint faithful into placeholder positions of power provided by Barack Obama as formally announced in the Cairo speech. Before the first Cold War, a man named Martin Dies rang the claxon on communism’s infiltration into the Unites States before Joseph McCarthy later championed the same call during the 1940’s-1950’s. The Truman administration then made a fateful decision to turn off the sound, while today the same mission is underway, so increase the volume to hear this alert. Today, America has no Dies/McCarthy except those few who have uncovered the White House playbook and vetted evidence while outside the landscape of the governmental positions with few exceptions. The trophy is America, where in the recent decade, radical Muslims and Islamists have moved to American shores coming from a Russian support  push, approved by the more hidden appeasement of Obama through the Hillary Clinton ‘reset’ button when Putin returned to power. In the daylight of our civilian population and the infiltration of the lobby streets of Washington DC along with at least seven cabinet departments of the Federal government, Sharia, Zakat and Taqiyya are there for all to see and trace with the full scale likeness that harkens back a handful of decades.

The names listed below under the red and green columns while not exhaustive, are those who have gained deep and viable positions within government both decades ago, under red and in very recent years, under green. Either in present day they are part of lobby groups with open access to high level government officials or are in fact on the Federal payroll in such departments as Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Defense, and the State Department, the main Justice Department or more central at the White House itself. Those listed on the red side are from the Communist infusion having all the same like roles within government during World War ll and later the Cold War. The green side contains names you must learn to know today.

[Go to the Source for the list of names. I could not get the columns to show properly here]

Hillary and William Clinton The surrender of America to her enemies by the Obama administration is real and has been launched, and is gaining increasing speed. This new and fresh cultural order where Islamists and their coalition forces are fighting for and winning the resources and real estate and hidden government mandates established in secret, a single governmental system on an epic scale. Most often, their method is based upon political correctness and under the guise of human rights, religious protection and outreach.

The Muslim Brotherhood, CAIR and INSA to name a few have deep ties to al Qaeda, al Shabaab, the Taliban and Dar Ululoom, now better known as the Haqqani Network. To provide an abbreviated summary of Haqqani please consider the fact that Mullah Omar is the top leader for this thirty year old terror network established by Pakistan’s ISI, the intelligence division in country and calls on the relationship with Lashker e Jhangvi as, the Mubai Raiders and the very group that kidnapped Daniel Pearl and killed him on video for the world to witness. They have been formally extended an open pathway to the United States by Barack Obama and his benefactors including Vladimir Putin and George Soros with legitimacy, sovereignty and finally diplomatic status. America has been at war with al Qaeda since before 9-11 and while the focus was on al Qaeda in particular theaters of operation, they have moved on to Algeria and North Africa expanding further beyond the static Middle East. It is certain that key al Qaeda leaders have been killed by CIA operated drone strikes yet a constant re-branding of networks and ties continue. The Obama administration has been negotiating directly with the Taliban for more than two years to force a peace agreement that includes the transfer of five key Taliban leaders from Guantanamo to Qatar. To this date, it is not confirmed whether this move has taken place under a cloak and dagger transfer. Yet today, the Obama administration has been secretly releasing Taliban tribal leaders from prisons in Afghanistan. The Taliban is the main focus of the Obama administration for peace agreements while the Taliban network extends from Afghanistan into Pakistan. Abdul Salam Zaeef, an Pakistani Ambassador to the Taliban is also a member. Tehrik e Taliban’s leader, Baitullah Mahsad claimed responsibility for killing the Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto changing the face of the leadership of Pakistan to that of an adversary.

It should be noted that there are in fact two laws if not more that apply to stop this sedition if not treason by countless government officials in addition to the Oath they swear to upon taking a government job. The laws include the Hatch Act and the McCarren Walter Act and we can include the Patriot Act to the equation. Under Barack Obama with his circle of large like-minded supporters, a system is being created to orphan the citizenry of America as we are caught up in this snare of a green mission under an ideology in complete opposition to our Constitution. The McCarren Walter Act of 1952 has been amended several times, where is has been watered down for the sake of political correctness, however in its original form, President Truman vetoed the law, but it prevailed due to majority votes in the House and Senate. This law was and is designed to manage immigration, deportation and the termination of employment as a result of the fallout in the 1940’s-50’s over the communist invasion in key government roles where subversive activities against the United States were tracked and proven. The Hatch Act forbids government employees from engaging in political actions yet the Muslim Brotherhood has employed at least three White House employees that are members of the Muslim Brotherhood where they are in fact engaging in political Muslim ideology and drafting mandates supporting the cause. What is more, appeasement entitlement programs and business grants as well as functional doctrine within the military, the Department of Justice and even Education have been completely altered and in many cases re-drafted that complies with the laws of the Hadith and Islam. The Hatch Act and the McCarren Walter Act are laws have been both selectively applied and in many cases waived completely by several government cabinets including the State Department. Islam is a government where a God is added to neutralize the debate and it has been extremely effective out of fear of retribution.

Public school systems in the United States have altered meals served, altered the curriculum and even the hours for football practice to the middle of the night for the sake of one Muslim student. Domestic court systems have applied Sharia law in at least 27 cases rather than Constitutional law.  Under the appeasement to Islam, Barack Obama has replaced the military chaplain program at the Pentagon with a more Islamic objective. Muslim Brotherhood liaisons have been created at all levels of our government where they have enjoyed full compliance of their goals that include removing Muslim training materials from the FBI and DHS lesson plans. Iftar dinners have been hosted by military Generals as well as by Tim Geithner at the Treasury Department. Only recently has the Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Bureau of Investigation stopped all interaction with  national fusion centers where more local law enforcement has been taken out of the intelligence infrastructure, ceasing all state terror database use, investigation and eventual arrests. States such as Minnesota, Maine and Tennessee have become the target bases for green-lighted green card refugees from areas across the globe where in one particular sector, the Somalis take on the larger numbers of displaced travelers. It should be noted that there are countless pockets of real estate in America now that are essentially ‘no-go’ zones where Islam has been provided their own sovereignty, where foreign law and culture are applied rather than assimilation into our country and our values. Security clearances by the Department of Homeland Security and the State Department have been outsourced where a quota is forced to for acceptance into America without comprehensive investigations are completed.

The Soviets aligned with radical Arabs and Muslims decades ago to create the Red agenda, while they are doing the same today. Russia has subsidized Muslim factions for the sake of land sales and use in the Northern Caucus for the acquisition of oil and natural gas infrastructures. Outwardly, Russia is in opposition to the terror factions, however, more recently we witness Russia aligning completely with Syria, North African networks and al Qaeda and even FARC for the sake of resources.

What is upon America is the Russian Muslim Brotherhood Shariah mafia agenda with Barack Obama taking the lead as the grand marshal to complete the mission and the trophy, the flag of Islam is soon to fly over the White House. It can no longer be denied that the entire faction of Obama handlers inside government or outside government have a single subversive objective for the sake of radical Islam.

Links for reference:

http://frontpagemag.com/2012/05/04/the-muslim-brotherhood-in-america-a-video-course/

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304363104577390141194301150.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2012/05/04/blaze-magazine-exclusive-family-ties-the-muslim-brotherhood-and-george-soros/

http://sharlaslabyrinth.blogspot.com/2012/05/iran-turning-us-mosques-into-command.html?spref=tw

Islam’s Cloud Over America

 

Justin O. Smith

by Justin O Smith

President Obama, Governor Haslam and a host of state and local officials fiddle, while the flames of Sharia law and Sharia finance dance across the State of Tennessee and all America; and, it is now evident that Nathan Buttrey was less than forthcoming with the facts when I spoke with him on June 8th. However harmless the ‘Tennessean’, reporter Chas Sisk, Clint Brewer or Nathan Buttrey and the Gov’s office tries to portray Ms Samar Ali’s appointment to the Economic Community Development office, it definitely does warrant greater scrutiny.

As reported in ‘Shariah Finance Watch’ by Frank Gaffney, ‘Washington Times’ columnist and ex-Assistant Deputy Secretary of  Defense, on June 7th and corroborated in the ‘Tennessean’ on June 13th, Ms Ali specialized in “Shariah compliant transactions”, and she has advocated and facilitated Sharia finance deals as an associate for Hogan Lovells in Washington, DC. She structured deals so that they respected Islam’s ban on collecting interest.

Sharia finance is considered “dawa”/missionary activity by the World Islamic Economic Forum, “a trade association for Muslims”. More accurately, Sharia finance is financial “jihad”/holy war and it is a first step towards inserting Sharia law into any nation. Quite often in Muslim transactions, “zakat”, a tithe of sorts is requested to be sent to specific organizations or charities in lieu of interest, and far too often these funds aid fundamental terrorists… enemies of America, just as the case of CAIR’s Holy Land Foundation illustrated perfectly. This is the same financial system that gave rise to the Taliban through “zakat” from Prince Turki al-Faisal, the director of Saudi intelligence.

Regardless of the “spurious” nature Brewer and Gov Haslam’s RHINOs may attach to the contention of many that Ms Ali’s activities in the ECD should be closely monitored and her past Sharia finance deals reviewed, it is specious and base ignorance for Brewer, Buttrey and the Gov’s office to assert that Ms Ali’s duties “have nothing to do with Shariah law-or even finance.” They are asking us to abandon logic, common sense and reason, as they advance a ludicrous and erroneous assumption that as the international director of Tennessee’s trade program she could not possibly be in a position to advance Sharia finance proposals… What better place if not an international trade program to do just that?!?

It truly is well and good that Ms Ali has “encouraged dialogue between Israeli and Palestinian youth” through the YMCA; I am overjoyed that she has worked with Homeland Security, a network rife with Muslim Brotherhood members and Hamas sympathizers… led by Janet Napolitano, who would not know a terrorist from Obama if he were laying beside her in her boudoir; and, it is great that she has a law degree from Vanderbilt which has become a supporter of every anti-American, anti-Christian Left-Muslim agenda imagineable. I hope and pray that she is as patriotic and all-American as described, but I don’t believe anyone who does anything, even in the remotest sense, to promote Sharia finance within the US can really have America’s best interests at heart or truly love America as I do!

Don’t You wonder, “Why is Islam and everything Muslim being advocated so stridently and advanced at all levels of US government over all other religions?… contrary to the U.S. Constitution. And, why does the Left preach “multiculturalism” only for Muslims?… never for the Hindus or the Buddhists or the Christians.

America has steadily witnessed an increased Islamic “cultural exchange”/invasion largely at the behest of the Saudi government. The Saudis state that if America desires them to be more tolerant of the western civilization that America, too, must become more tolerant of Islam: in essence, they ask the US to accept the design of its own destruction by compromising the principles of freedom with the evil and subjugation of Islam.

Obama’s “fundamental transformation” includes making democracy inert and turning the US into a nation where everything can be stated except the Truth, as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pushes the UN’s 16/18 Resolution down our throats at the behest of the Organization for Islamic Cooperation… a resolution that not only criminalizes criticizing Islam, but it also incorporates every detail of the Cairo Convention: Along with the inalienable right to practice their “religion”/ideology and habits, Muslim immigrants shall have the right to propogate and disseminate Islamic “religion” and habits… Understand?! The Cairo Convention would force the US to cooperate with Islamic nations and allow Sharia law into US banking/financial, scientific/nuclear, industrial and commercial fields. The US has not ratified this yet, however, Obama has stepped ahead on his own.

Far too many initiatives are taken in favor of the minority Islamic “religion” at the expense of the minority. Companies like Whirlpool, Dell and Tyson comply with the Islamic request for liturgical accomodations for Muslim employees. The predominantly Polish and Catholic city of Detroit has a noise ordinance that forbids the peal of Christian church bells, while the Muslim minority is allowed to broadcast their noisy prayers from 6am to 10pm. And finally, not too many years ago, America witnessed the phony liberals who like the Talibans took delight as they forced the removal of the Ten Commandments from the Birmingham Courthouse, because Muslims complained that they had been written by “the Jew Moses.” Lest anyone has forgotten, Our American Heritage is Judeo-Christian principles and Western philosophies!

The Left-Muslim alliance proposes to tear America from its Judaic-Christian roots, and during the past twenty years, I am certain it has seemed to many Americans that the Nazi Sigrid Hunke’s ‘Allahs Sonne uber dem Abenland’ (The Sun of Allah Shines Over the West) was becoming our societal reality… one where the Islamofascists “free America from Christianity” and the Jews and infidels are “eliminated in a hurry.” Does anyone besides me feel like you are watching a Wermacht parade in front of the Reichstag?!?

ICNA Relief Promotes Jihad Donations

IPT News: The charitable wing of a major American Muslim organization is promoting donations to extremist causes, undercutting a nationwide campaign to improve its image. The website link from the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) Relief division hints at deeper connections to extremism and terror, both by the charitable branch and by its parent organization.

ICNA’s self-proclaimed goal is “to communicate the message of Islam to the society at large” and “also to initiate change in the social and political spheres [of American society] in light of the principles of the noble Qur’an,” according to the group’s 2020 Vision program.

“The future of Dawah [proselytizing] in this society is directly linked with the ability of ICNA’s membership to communicate the message of Islam to the society at large,” it explains. Over time, the group encourages “moving to the next level of Dawah, aimed towards the movers and shakers of the society.”

As that program outlines, that goal means more engagement with non-Muslims to promote Islam. ICNA is in the midst of a pro-Sharia campaign, which explains that Islamic law isn’t something threatening to American society or order.

A long history of extremism stands in the way. ICNA’s magazine, conferences, and ideology have promoted violent jihad and supremacy rhetoric for decades, and continue to emphasize Islam as a civilization alternative to secular society.

The group’s 2010 Member’s Hand Book illustrated how further acceptance of Islam would lead to an Islamic state in America and then to a global Caliphate. “With this work of propagation of Islam, social reform, and the truth is introduced to a large part of the society. A good part of the society’s thinking individuals join the movement. Then it may move to establish an Islamic society, obedient to Allah’s commands,” the hand book states.

To change beliefs about Islam and to further ICNA’s role in promoting it, the 2020 plan emphasizes social justice and charity issues. But the discovery of more extremist content on ICNA Relief’s website shows that although the group has initiated a new public image, an ideology of extremism prevails just under the surface.

The charity website links to a chapter about the giving of zakat, obligatory tithing, from Let Us Be Muslim, a text by Islamist preacher Abu Ala Maududi. He was the founder of Jamaat-e-Islami, a South Asian extremist organization that advocates the overthrow of secular governments and their replacement with a worldwide Islamic state.

Read more…


 

ICNA: Zakat for Jihad

 

Shariah Finance Watch:

The Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) was identified as a Muslim Brotherhood organization in the Holy Land Foundation prosecution, the largest successful terrorism financing prosecution in US history.

Recently, ICNA announced that they are embarking upon a $3 million propaganda campaign to promote Shariah in America:

http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/p18956.xml?genre_id=

ICNA has a division called ICNA Relief, which professes to do all sorts of good works. On ICNA Relief’s web site, they have a section on Zakat, including a Zakat “calculator” which helps Muslims figure out how much money they need to donate to zakat (a form of tithing in Islam):

http://icnarelief.org/site/index.php/articles/zakat-calculator

Note that on ICNA Relief’s zakat calculator page, there is a link to a page labeled “FAQs.” As you might expect, FAQ stands for Frequently Asked Questions:

http://zakat.110mb.com/index.php?p=1_5_FAQs

Notice that there are several questions on the FAQ page.

Number 15 is of particular interest:

Whom Should we Pay Zakaat to

If you follow that link you come to a new page entitled “Who is entitled to receive Zakat?”

http://zakat.110mb.com/index.php?p=1_12

Answer Number 8 for the question “Who is entitled to receive Zakat?” is the proverbial “smoking  gun.”

8. Fi Sabeelillah: Those who are away from home in the path of Allah. Those in Jihaad, those seeking knowledge or a stranded Haji may be assist with Zakat if they are in need.

Those in Jihaad…(usually spelled Jihad).

No doubt, ICNA will complain that we have misinterpreted or misunderstood the meaning of the term “Jihad.”

ICNA will claim that Jihad simply means to “struggle” or “strive.”

Balderdash.

Let us examine definitions of Jihad from two authoritative sources.

The first is the Quran itself. In this case, specifically The Noble Qu’ran, translated into English by two scholars: Dr. Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din Al-Hilali, PhD, professor of Islamic Faith and Teachings at the Islamic University, Al-Madinah Al-Munawwarah, Saudi Arabia and Dr. Muhammad Mushin Khan of the same institution. The Noble Qu’ran was published by Darussalam Publishers and Distributors, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. It has been catalogued by King Fahad National Library. On page 818, in a glossary accompanying the text of the Quran, The Noble Qu’ran provides the following definition of Jihad:

Jihad: Holy fighting in the Cause of Allah or any other kind of effort to make Allah’s Word superior. Jihad is regarded as one of the fundamentals of Islam.

Our second source is Reliance of the Traveler: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law.

Reliance of the Traveler is one of the world’s most widely read manuals of Shariah law. It has been endorsed by a variety of Islamic authorities, including Al Azhar University and IIIT (International Institute of Islamic Thought).

On page 599 of Reliance of the Traveler, readers can find the following passage:

o9.0 JIHAD

(O: Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion…

The scriptural basis for jihad, prior to scholarly consensus is such Koranic verses as:

(1) “Fighting is prescribed for you” (Koran 2:216);

(2) “Slay them wherever you find them” (Koran 4:89);

(3) “Fight the idolators utterly” (Koran 9:36);

and such hadiths as the one related by Bukhari and Muslim that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said:

“I have been commanded to fight people until they testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and perform the prayer, and pay zakat. If they say it, they have saved their blood and possessions from me, except for the rights of Islam over them. And their final reckoning is with Allah”;

and the hadith reported by Muslim,

“To go forth in the morning or evening to fight in the path of Allah is better than the whole world and everything in it.”

Again, no doubt, ICNA will claim that Jihad does not mean warfare to establish the religion. They will claim that the “greater Jihad” is the internal struggle in all men’s hearts, etc.

But if that was really the most widely accepted definition of Jihad, why does Reliance of the Traveler define the recipients of zakat who are in the category listed in ICNA Relief’s zakat calculator so explicitly as warriors?

On page 272, section h8.17 of Reliance, that category is labeled:

THOSE FIGHTING FOR ALLAH

The seventh category is those fighting for Allah, meaning people engaged in Islamic military operations for whom no salary has been allotted in the army roster (O: but who are volunteers for jihad without remuneration). They are given enough to suffice them for the operation, even if affluent; of weapons, mounts, clothing, and expenses (O: for the duration of the journey, round trip, and the time they spend there, even if prolonged. Though nothing has been mentioned here of the expense involved in supporting such people’s families during this period, it seems clear that they should also be given it).

But there is still more evidence. If Jihad truly means to “struggle” and not warfare to establish the religion, how does ICNA Relief explain the names of all these terrorist organizations?

Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami (Pakistan, Bangladesh, India)

Islamic Front for Armed Jihad (Algeria)

Islamic Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine (Lebanon)

Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine (Israel)

Islamic Jihad Organization (Lebanon)

Islamic Jihad Union (Uzbekistan)

Jama’at al-Jihad al-Islami (Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Russia)

Laskar Jihad (Indonesia)

United Jihad Council (India)

From the Slaughterhouse to Hamas

Gates of Vienna:

The issue of halal slaughter has been much in the news lately in Quebec. Quebecers have discovered that a lot of the meat sold in Quebec is halal, even though it may not be labeled as such. Just how much unmarked halal meat passes over supermarket checkout counters has become a topic of debate.

Then there is the question of where all the money goes. In order to have its meat certified halal, a slaughterhouse must pay a fee to an official certification outfit. All halal certification in Canada is controlled by the Muslim Association of Canada (MAC). The franchise is lucrative, and MAC rakes in a lot of cash, thanks to the halal racket.

It turns out that a large chunk of money makes its way through the zakat process into the pockets of Islamic terrorist organizations. In the following video, Marc Lebuis of Point de Bascule talks to Michael Coren about the results of his site’s investigation into the money trail from the halal slaughterhouses to Hamas.

Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for uploading this video:

The accompanying article at Pointe de Bascule is lengthy and rich in detail. Here’s the introductory section:

Muslim Association of Canada: a contributor to Hamas fund collector controls halal certification in Quebec

[…]

Part 1 — Presentation and General Conclusions

In her March 13 report broadcast on Dumont le midi TV show, journalist Caroline Lacroix revealed that Olymel pays thousands of dollars to the “Association des viandes halal that is controlled by Abou-Baker-Assedique mosque” located at 371 Jean-Talon E. in Montreal for the halal certification of its chickens.

During his March 23 TV show that took place after the halal issue was addressed at the Quebec National Assembly, Mario Dumont highlighted that all political parties in Quebec City had been very careful not to bring up the financial aspect of the issue:

Mario Dumont — video 04:19: Nobody discussed the money issue. What does it fund? Where does the money go? Are we financing mosques without knowing it? It seems that this issue is even more taboo. Everybody is very careful not to talk about it.

Point de Bascule spent the last few days at finding an answer to Mario Dumont’s legitimate question. Who is pulling the strings behind this Aboubakerseddik Mosque on Jean-Talon Street that receives commissions from companies like Olymel, that get their chickens halal certified, as we have learned on March 13?

Here are the main conclusions that we can draw at this time:

1.   The mosque is part of a cultural centre. The centre also acts as an organization providing halal certification under a different name. We are dealing with one enterprise involved in two activities: management of recreation and culture and meat inspection.
2.   The certification agency is controlled by the Muslim Association of Canada (MAC), the main Muslim Brotherhood organization in Canada. MAC owns the building where the certification agency and the cultural centre are based and the administrators of the certification agency are former MAC directors or they have publicly endorsed MAC’s positions in the past.
3.   For the last ten years, MAC has been an important contributor to IRFAN-Canada, the Hamas fund collector in the country. Hamas is involved in a program aiming not only at the elimination of the state of Israel but also at the destruction of Western civilization. In a speech given on October 2011, its leader Mahmoud Al-Zahhar stated that “This (Western) civilization will not be able to withstand the great and glorious Islam.” The Canada Revenue Agency revoked IRFAN-Canada’s charity status in April 2011 after having concluded that it financed the terrorist organization Hamas.
4.   MAC’s halal program is part of a global Muslim Brotherhood’s strategy. In 2010 in Islamabad, a leader of the Islamist organization, the mufti of Bosnia, Mustafa Ceric, urged Muslims “to conquer the world through Halal movement.”

Before having been able to analyse all legal implications related to the halal issue, Point de Bascule would like to make two proposals as a starter:

1.   All products for which commissions are being paid to imams for halal certification should be properly identified.
2.   No public money should be spent to buy products that will be served in schools, in daycare centres, in military bases, in prisons and in other public institutions if these products have been certified by imams who belong to organizations that received money or gave money to terrorist organizations’ fund collectors or if they are involved in a project aiming at destroying Western civilization from within.

It would be beneficial that private certification agencies be set up to guaranty that the products that they approve come from animals who have been desensitized before being slaughtered and that no profit coming from the sale of their certified products will go to the financing of Islamic jihad…

Read the rest at Point de Bascule.

Need to Know the Zakat Rules in Saudi Arabia? Just ask KPMG

Shariah Finance Watch:

It is widely known that much of the funding for Jihadist terrorist organizations, such as Al Qaeda, Hamas, Abu Sayyef and Jemaah Islamiyah come from private donations to Islamic charities through zakat payments, a system of tithing in Islam.

The Saudi government claims that they are virtually powerless to stop this activity, something that makes us incredulous, given the Shariah police state that is Saudi Arabia.

But that is the whole point. Wealthy Saudis and their charities participate in zakat because Shariah commands it.

And Shariah also mandates that one of the eight destinations for zakat are “those fighting in the way of allah.”

This is further defined as those who are engaged in Islamic military operations but who are not listed on an Army roster.

Muslims who are able to do so must donate 2.5% of their wealth (5% for Shia) toward zakat. Zakat is very important in Islam and is considered one of the five pillars of Islam.

And modern administration of zakat often involves Islamic charities and governments.

Zakat is a concern because, as the bipartisan 9-11 Commission Report detailed, it has in fact been used to fund Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups:

From page 170 of the 9/11 Commission Report:

Al Qaeda and its friends took advantage of Islam’s strong calls for charitable giving, zakat. These financial facilitators also appeared to rely heavily on certain imams at mosques who were willing to divert zakat donations to al Qaeda’s cause.

Al Qaeda also collected money from employees of corrupt charities. It took two approaches to using charities for fundraising.One was to rely on al Qaeda sympathizers in specific foreign branch offices of large, international charities–particularly those with lax external oversight and ineffective internal controls, such as the Saudi-based al Haramain Islamic Foundation. Smaller charities in various parts of the globe were funded by these large Gulf charities and had employees who would siphon the money to al Qaeda.

In addition, entire charities, such as the al Wafa organization may have wittingly participated in funneling money to al Qaeda. In those cases al Qaeda operatives controlled the entire organization, including access to bank accounts. Charities were a source of money and also provided significant cover, which enabled operatives to travel undetected under the guise of working for a humanitarian organization.

From page 372 of the 9/11 Commission Report:

Charitable giving, or zakat, is one of the five pillars of Islam. It is broader and more pervasive than Western ideas of charity–functioning also as a form of income tax, educational assistance, foreign aid, and a source of political influence. The Western notion of the separation of civic and religious duty does not exist in Islamic cultures. Funding charitable works is an integral function of the governments in the Islamic world. It is so ingrained in Islamic culture that in Saudi Arabia, for example, a department within the Saudi Ministry of Finance and National Economy collects zakat directly, much as the U.S. Internal Revenue Service collects payroll withholding tax. Closely tied to zakat is the dedication of the government to propagating the Islamic faith, particularly the Wahhabi sect that flourishes in Saudi Arabia.

Traditionally, throughout the Muslim world, there is no formal oversight mechanism for donations. As Saudi wealth increased, the amounts contributed by individuals and the state grew dramatically. Substantial sums went to finance Islamic charities of every kind. While Saudi domestic charities are regulated by the Ministry of Labor and Social Welfare, charities and international relief agencies, such as the World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY). are currently regulated by the Ministry of Islamic Affairs. This ministry uses zakat and government funds to spread Wahhabi beliefs throughout the world, including in mosques and schools. Often these schools provide the only education available; even in affluent countries, Saudi-funded Wahhabi schools are often the only Islamic schools. Some Wahhabi-funded organizations have been exploited by extremists to further their goal of violent jihad against non-Muslims.

In other words, Islamic charities have played an integral role in Al Qaeda’s funding structure, and in some cases Islamic charities have also played an operational role for Al Qaeda. Furthermore, the system of zakat has laid the foundation for violent jihad through the promotion of Wahhabi (Salafi) Islam, the religion of Al Qaeda.

Dhaka Ahsania Mission is a UN-affiliated NGO (non-governmental organization) that does relief work around the world. It also has a zakat fund called the Ahsania Mission Zakat Fund. The fund has offices around the globe including in New York City.

On the fund’s web site, it provides a complete primer on the Islamic system of zakat. Included in that primer is a listing of how zakat is distributed. Number 7 on the 8 destinations for zakat:

One who fights for the cause of Allah.

 
The most authoritative source for such information is a book which is available on Amazon called “The Reliance of the Traveler, A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law.” That book has a whole section devoted to the rules of zakat, including “THE EIGHT CATEGORIES OF RECIPIENTS.”  On page 272, section h8.17, one category is labeled:

THOSE FIGHTING FOR ALLAH

The seventh category is those fighting for Allah, meaning people engaged in Islamic military operations for whom no salary has been allotted in the army roster (O: but who are volunteers for jihad without remuneration). They are given enough to suffice them for the operation, even if affluent; of weapons, mounts, clothing, and expenses (O: for the duration of the journey, round trip, and the time they spend there, even if prolonged. Though nothing has been mentioned here of the expense involved in supporting such people’s families during this period, it seems clear that they should also be given it).

This passage, from this widely-used Shariah text seems to have been written expressly about zakat payments to charities which have funded Al Qaeda, HAMAS, Hezbollah and the Taliban. Note from the passage that such payments are meant specifically for irregular forces who are not part of any army roster, which describes terrorist/guerilla/insurgent groups exactly. Note that they are meant for “Islamic” military operations and not secular groups (i.e. HAMAS and not the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command). Note that such payments are made even if the recipient is affluent…like Osama Bin Laden. And, finally, the families of fighters are to be taken care of, such as payments by Saddam Hussein and Saudi princes to families of Islamikaze bombers in Gaza and the West Bank.

All too often, the destinations of zakat payments are to Jihadists, simply because Shariah mandates it.

Maybe that is why so many Islamic charities have been implicated in terrorism financing:

Consider that the Treasury Department has designated the Saudi-based Union of Good as having ties to terror and British authorities have designated a charity in the UK a terrorist entity because it has ties to the Union of Good.

The Union of Good is an umbrella group of 53 charities. Yes, 53. By the way, it is headed by Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the most prominent Sunni shariah scholar in the world.

So, when the Union of Good was designated a terrorist entity, 53 Islamic charities were caught in the web. This hardly seems isolated to us.

Especially when you consider our detailed report on 27 other Islamic charities that have been tied to terrorism. That gives as a round number of 80 Islamic charities tied to Jihad. That is a lot of charities to be tied to terrorism. Why didn’t The Guardian uncover this same information?

 Go to Sharia Finance Watch to see a list of 27 Islamic Charity organizations that have been either indicted or designated by the Treasury under Executive Act 13224, as sponsors of terrorism.

All of this makes the KPMG report so disturbing. KPMG, one of the West’s leading accounting, auditing and consulting firms, publishes a guide to abiding by Saudi tax and zakat regulations.

Readers of SFW may wish to take this into account when making decisions about the firms with which you do business.