UTT Throwback Thursday: Mainstream Media’s Support for Terrorists

Understanding the Threat, by John Guandolo, March 16, 2017:

Following Monday’s UTT article “Is CNN Guilty of Material Support of Terrorism?” there was an overwhelming positive response from UTT followers who noted the many other incidents of mainstream media defending terrorists, specifically Hamas doing business as the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR).

So, for today’s UTT Throwback Thursday we will look at Hamas’ primary U.S. front organization – CAIR – and how the U.S. media continues to defend them despite the undeniable evidence they are a terrorist organization, and how the media lifts up other Muslim leaders who turn out to be terrorists.

In the largest terrorism financing and Hamas trial ever successfully prosecuted in American history (US v Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development – HLF – Dallas, 2008) the U.S. Department of Justice identified the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and Founder/Chairman Emeritus Omar Ahmad as being a part of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee, which is Hamas.

The other two founders are Rafeeq Jaber and Nihad Awad.  Awad is the current leader of CAIR and, in the professional opinion of UTT, the General Masul (leader) of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood.

Hamas is a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization in the United States.  Please review UTT’s CAIR is Hamas document detailing a portion of the evidence demonstrating CAIR is a terrorist organization (Hamas).

So how does the media describe CAIR?

NBC and CBS call CAIR an “advocacy group.”  ABC News calls CAIR an “Islamic civil rights group.”  CNN calls them a “Muslim advocacy group.”

ABC actually dropped a new show, “Alice in Arabia” before they ever began shooting because Hamas (dba CAIR) complained.

In an article on February 14, 2017, PR Newswire describes CAIR as “the nation’s largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization” and notes the news was provided by CAIR.

On a regular basis NPR identifies CAIR as “a leading Muslim civil rights organization.”

Local media across the nation identifies CAIR as “a Muslim advocacy group,” “America’s largest Muslim civil liberties organization” or something similar here, here, here, here and here.

Remember that media outlets like the Washington Post, NPR, and others called Al Qaeda financier Abdurahman Alamoudi the “pillar of the Muslim community” in Washington, D.C. and Al Qaeda leader Anwar Awlaki the “new face” of moderate Islam before the United States killed him in a drone strike.

The media is batting 0/1000 when it comes to identifying friendly Muslim leaders and groups.

The facts are already in evidence detailing the ties to the Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas to groups like CAIR, ISNA, MAS, MSA, IIIT, ICNA, MPAC, MLFA, Muslim Advocates, and all the others yet the mainstream media never asks the tough questions or does their homework on these issues.

Apparently “investigative journalism” is a forgotten trade and truth, facts and evidence are no longer sought after by today’s “journalists.”

Is CNN Guilty of Material Support of Terrorism?

Understanding the Threat, by John Guandolo, March 12, 2017:

Could a reporter and/or media organization which intentionally provides a terrorist or terrorist organization air time to promote the terrorist’s agenda be charged as in violation of Title 18 of U.S. Code, Section 2339A, Material Support to Terrorists?

Mainstream media attacking those who speak truth about the threat of Islam in the United States is not new, nor is the media’s support for the terrorist group Hamas doing business as the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR).  However, when the media runs lengthy propaganda pieces for Hamas, regurgitating their talking points, while at the same time attacking officials who are sworn to defend U.S. citizens, do these actions constitute providing our enemies with material support in their war against the United States?

Last week CNN ran stories about Oklahoma State Representative John Bennett related to the “Muslim Day” at the Oklahoma State House.  Why, you might ask, was there a “Muslim Day” at the Oklahoma State House?  Because Hamas (dba CAIR) hosted one and no one stopped them.

Hamas leader in Oklahoma Adam Soltani

In the CNN story, CNN correspondent Sara Ganim supports and defends Oklahoma’s Hamas leader Adam Soltani who slanders and defames state legislator John Bennett, and Ganim also defended Hamas doing business as the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR).  See the 3 minute video HERE.

 

At no point did Ms. Ganim identify CAIR as a “member of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee” which is Hamas in the United States, as the U.S. Department of Justice has per the evidence in the largest terrorism financing and Hamas trial ever successfully prosecuted in American history (US v Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), Dallas 2008).  Nor did Ms. Ganim or CNN reveal that numerous CAIR leaders have been convicted of terrorism charges and incarcerated or deported.

Neither Ms. Ganim nor CNN revealed Hamas is an inherent part of the Muslim Brotherhood whose stated objective is to wage “civilization jihad” to overthrow our government through all means necessary including violence until sharia becomes the law of the land.

When CNN quoted Representative John Bennett’s questions he posed to Muslims at his office, it is evident neither Ms. Ganim nor CNN did any research – the point of Mr. Bennett’s exercise – to determine the truth of the matters regarding Islamic doctrine – sharia.  Ms. Ganim and CNN dutifully gave Hamas, a designated terrorist organization and its leader in Oklahoma, Adam Soltani, air time on national television, thus providing propaganda for terrorists while slandering an American hero and elected member of the Oklahoma state house.

United States Marine and Oklahoma State Representative John Bennett

It should be noted CNN also did not mention Representative John Bennett is a Marine and combat veteran who serves his nation honorably.

Mr. Bennett speaks about this incident in a radio interview which can be heard HERE.

The Oklahoma media, for the most part, jumps on the bandwagon on these matters.

Last week, when UTT traveled to Louisiana to train law enforcement officers and first responders, numerous media outlets, including the Associated Press, defended Hamas (dba CAIR) and tried to diminish the work of UTT with ad hominem attacks without ever discussing the facts of the matter.

Several of the media outlets were forced to retract their articles and amend them because they were slanderous and defamatory towards UTT and it’s founder John Guandolo.  However, the media continues to identify Hamas (dba CAIR) as a “Muslim advocacy group” or a “Muslim civil rights organization.”

In fact, CAIR is neither.  CAIR is a terrorist organization because it is a Hamas organization.  Are we to believe that 15 years after 9/11 all the reporters, producers, editors, and others with CNN, the Associated Press, and many other mainstream media organizations are simple so stupid they cannot review evidence and facts that clearly identifies CAIR as a Hamas entity?

Are these media organizations providing material support to Hamas (CAIR) because they ideologically agree with them?

In either case, there appears to be direct support for terrorists by these media organizations and their reporters, and UTT is hopeful the Department of Justice will respond accordingly.

UTT Throwback Thursday: Attacks on UTT Intensify, But Have Less Effect

Understanding the Threat, by John Guandolo, March 9, 2017:

In the summer of 2014, UTT scheduled a one-day training program for law enforcement in the Phoenix, Arizona area hosted by the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office (MCAO).  The program was designed to teach police officers and investigators about the Islamic Movement in the United States and Arizona, and provide them with tools to help them identify and investigate the threat.

The attacks against UTT and the MCAO were immediate.

On August 14th the Muslim Advocates along with 75 other organizations sent a letter to President Obama’s Counterterrorism Advisor Lisa Monaco which called UTT’s training “bigoted” and asked the administration to re-train all law enforcement officers who have been through such training.

By September 10th, the ACLU and several Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas organizations called for the training to be cancelled, saying the speakers (UTT President John Guandolo, Former CIA Case Officer Clare Lopez, and Former Department of Defense Inspector General Joseph Schmitz) were “known for inaccurate, dangerous statements about the Muslim community.”

The letter, signed by the ACLU’s legal director in Arizona, was also signed by the current and previous leaders of Hamas (dba CAIR) in Arizona (Imraan Siddiqi and Mohamed El-Sharkawy), the leader of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Muslim American Society (AZ), and the leaders of the MB’s Islamic Community Center of Tempe (ICCT) and Islamic Community Center of Phoenix (ICCP).  The properties of the ICCT (1131 East 6th Street, Tempe) and ICCP (7516 North Black Canyon Hwy, Phoenix) are owned by the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) which is the bank for the Muslim Brotherhood in North America.  In the largest terrorism financing and Hamas trial ever successfully prosecuted in U.S. history (US v Holy Land Foundation, Dallas 2008), NAIT was identified by the Department of Justice as a member of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood which directly funds Hamas, a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization.

In fact, the two jihadis who attacked the Draw Mohammad competition in Garland, Texas came from the ICCP.  Fortunately, they were killed before they could harm anyone.

On September 19, 2014, 300 police officers from all over Arizona sat through approximately 8 hours of training from UTT which detailed the jihadi threat with facts and evidence.  At the end of the program, when asked, all of the officers admitted they did not previously know the information presented, and all agreed the information is critical to protecting their community.

A victory for the good guys.

So why did the ACLU, the Arizona media, and religious leaders join with the terrorist group Hamas (doing business as CAIR) to condemn fact/evidence-based training which law enforcement calls “critical” to doing their jobs and has led to investigations into terrorism matters being opened in Arizona?  That is a fair question.

This week, UTT finds itself in Louisiana training over 150 law enforcement officers from all over the state. Six days ago, attacks and threats targeting UTT and the host – the Rapides Parish District Attorney – came from the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), Hamas (dba CAIR), the Associated Press and local media, and local Islamic organizations, including the Islamic Society of Central Louisiana.

What a shock.

Yet, over 150 law enforcement officers now know, from reviewing facts and evidence, the Muslim Brotherhood has a massive jihadi network here in America.

Police also now know CAIR was created by the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee, which is Hamas in the U.S., and got to hear from UTT’s Vice President Chris Gaubatz as he shared about his experience undercover inside Hamas’ (CAIR) headquarters in Washington, D.C.  Chris shared about retrieving over 12,000 documents from CAIR’s headquarters which revealed CAIR is involve in fraud, sedition, and terrorism.  The police now know CAIR is Hamas.

Chris also shared other experiences he had visiting mosques across America and what is being taught there.

Another victory for the truth and for freedom.

Now these officers will be able to take what they have learned back to the streets to identify real threats so they can use the full force of the law to protect their communities.

What are the common denominators for the successes then and now?

First is the power of UTT’s message, built on facts and evidence – real truth about real threats.

Secondly, the courage and tenacity of leaders like Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery and Rapides Parish District Attorney Phillip Terrell are an important key to these successes.

These warriors are ensuring their citizens are well-served by the men and women in blue.  Citizens of Maricopa County (AZ) and Rapides Parish (LA) should thank and support these men of courage.

HOLTON: Why Is Louisiana’s Media Attacking Efforts To Aid Law Enforcement In Keeping Us Safe Against Terrorism?

The Hayride, by Christopher Holton, March 6, 2017:

In case you haven’t noticed, the global jihadist insurgency has entered a new, more dangerous phase in the past two years.

The number of jihadis and the number of attacks that they have carried out–as well as the number of casualties they have inflicted and the number of countries they operate in–has grown drastically.

The excellent, private IntelCenter organization estimates that the Islamic State has killed 18,000 people in 28 countries since they declared their Caliphate on 29 June 2014.

This includes individual acts of jihad carried out in this country in places like Orlando, Chattanooga, Boston, Garland, San Bernardino, Queens and Philadelphia.

There is no reason to believe that this trend won’t continue. The effort to take down the caliphate was half-hearted at best because it simply wasn’t something President Obama was interested in. He apparently felt that the killing of Osama Bin Laden should have been enough. Never mind that the world has become awash in jihad since then.

Because of the complete lack of leadership on this vital issue, our federal bureaucratized counterterrorism apparatus has not even allowed to study Islamic threat doctrine–the very doctrine that the Islamic State cites repeatedly.

Time and time again we find that the warning signs of the jihadi attackers were missed. We were warned about the Tsarnaev brothers (the Boston bombers) repeatedly by the Russians and the FBI knew that their mosque was founded by a convicted Al Qaeda member, yet they were still able to carry out their attack.

There were warning signs about the San Bernardino jihadis as well. The female, Tafsheen Malik, used a fake address to obtain a visa to enter the U.S. She also gained entry into the U.S. under the horribly flawed federal “Visa Express” program that allowed applicants to bypass the interview in the screening process.

Moreover, DHS whistleblower Phillip Haney has testified before Congress and written in his new book, See Something, Say Nothing, that he had been ordered to cease investigations into Tablighi Jamaat, the notorious Islamist organization that had ties to the San Bernardino mosque.

Then there is the case of Orlando shooter, Omar Mateen, who was twice interviewed by the FBI because he was on the contact list for an American Islamikaze bomber in Syria and because he made “incendiary” remarks to co-workers about jihad. Oh, and his Dad posted pro-Taliban online videos too. He was given the “all-clear,” only to end up massacring 49 innocent Americans.

What all this points to is the vital need for state and local law enforcement to take the lead against jihad inside this country. I promise you, the NYPD does not wait for the FBI to vet suspected terrorists. Other state and local agencies around the country need to take the same approach, albeit with resources that can’t match the NYPD, which is probably the most effective counterterrorism law enforcement organization anywhere in the world.

The fact is, the Feds are unaccountable. They can’t follow up all the leads they have now and very often have a lack of knowledge as to what or who they are dealing with. I have a hunch that the FBI agents who interviewed Omar Mateen probably thought he was creepy at best, but they had nothing to charge him with and they had to go about their business. Complicating matters even more is the fact that both the FBI and DHS have been forbidden from tying Islam to terrorism. That restriction right there makes them ineffective at conducting counterintelligence operations.

State and local cops are not unaccountable. They have deep roots in their communities. If an Omar Mateen is in someone’s precinct and they know he is a known associate of an Islamikaze bomber and made threatening statements about terrorism, they will keep an eye on him way past the initial interview. There won’t be much more important in that precinct once an Omar Mateen comes to the local cops’ attention.

Furthermore, state and local police are not under any restriction to refrain from studying the enemy threat doctrine. If the local sheriff or police chief is bold enough, he will mandate that his intelligence and investigative people get educated about the threat in an objective, unbiased manner–allowing the subject matter to take them where it leads them, rather than starting from the position that there is no connection between Islam and terrorism.

State and local police are now at the tip of the spear in this war. 15 years ago America sent soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines overseas to protect us all from jihad. Today, local law enforcement is being tasked with protecting soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines from Jihad inside our own country. This is a profound shift in this war that has been lost on the overwhelming majority of the American people.

In Garland, Texas, it was a 62-year old motorcycle cop who gunned down the two jihadi attackers who were wielding AK47s.

In Chattanooga, Tennessee, it was the local police who gunned down Mohammad Abdulazeez.

In Boston, it was Boston PD who ran down the Tsarnaev brothers.

In Queens, New York, it was rookie patrolmen who were targeted by and gunned down Zale Thompson.

The San Bernardino shooters were killed by members of the San Bernardino Sheriff’s Department.

In Philadelphia, it was a police officer sitting in his patrol car that was targeted by Edward Archer in the name of ISIS.

And, of course, we know that it was the Orlando Police Department who responded to Omar Mateen’s massacre.

By the time DHS and FBI show up, they have to ask permission to cross the crime scene tape. In Marine Corps parlance, by the time the Feds get involved, it’s “right of bang.”

State and local police need to prepare to operate against jihadis “left of bang,” and that means taking their own initiative and not depending solely on our bureaucratized, federal counterterrorism apparatus for training or intelligence about potential bad guys in their jurisdictions.

Fortunately, increasingly, local sheriffs departments around the country have recognized the threat from jihad and have taken the initiative in training their personnel in the strategy and tactics needed to prepare, including studying the enemy threat doctrine as our jihadist enemies themselves teach it.

One such curriculum of training is from an organization called Understanding the Threat (UTT). The leader of this organization is former FBI agent and Force Recon Marine officer John Guandolo. There is no one in America more qualified to conduct training on the threat from jihad than this organization. Mr. Guandolo was decorated by the FBI for establishing the original training program for the Bureau on the Global Islamic Movement, particularly the Muslim Brotherhood. Guandolo’s colleague, Chris Gaubatz, is the only known operative to have conducted counterintelligence of HAMAS, when he interned for the Council on American Islamic Relations. That operation is detailed in Paul Sperry’s book, Muslim Mafia.

Recently, UTT has conducted training for several departments and agencies in Louisiana. Their program has come under fire from two out of state organizations with questionable ties and a record of nefarious activity. Louisiana’s media, including the Times-Picayune’s J.R. Ball at the link just above, have repeated the attacks of those organizations.

The first organization is the Southern Poverty Law Center (SLPC). At one time the SPLC may have served a useful purpose, but those times have long since passed. Today, the SPLC uses the term “hate” to silence and intimidate those with whom it disagrees politically.  The SPLC’s abuses of the term “hate” became so bad that in 2014, during the Obama administration, the FBI quit using the SPLC as a hate crimes resource.

The SPLC’s fast and loose use of the term and its blacklisting of those whom it disagrees with has even contributed indirectly to violence when Floyd Lee Corkins attacked the Family Research Council’s headquarters after viewing the SPLC’s irresponsible list of “hate groups.” Corkins shot and wounded a security guard during his attack.

The fact that the media regurgitates SPLC statements and data without question demonstrates the degree to which our free press has become corrupted by ideologues who no longer act as responsible journalists to report the news, but work as advocates for certain viewpoints.

The other organization that has raised objections to UTT’s training program in Louisiana is the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), a wing of the notorious Muslim Brotherhood here in the United States.

Michael Kunzelman of the Associated Press actually referred to CAIR as a “civil rights group,” again demonstrating the degree to which the media have been infected with corruption.

CAIR’s statement on the training actually included chilling code language used internationally by Islamist organizations to silence free speech. CAIR referred to John Guanadolo as an “Islamophobe.”

The term Islamophobe was made up by the International Institute for Islamic Thought (IIIT), a Muslim Brotherhood organizationwhose founding board included Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the spiritual guide for the Muslim Brotherhood for decades.  Qaradawi is also infamous for having been banned from travel to the US, the UK and France for his ties to terror. Moreover, he is particularly notorious for having, as a renowned Shariah scholar, instructed Muslim men on how they are to properly beat their wives and endorsed the barbaric, Shariah practice of female circumcision (known as Female Genital Mutilation (FGM).

IIIT coined the term Islamophobe with the express purpose of silencing critics of the Global Islamic Movement and to label enemies.

For CAIR to label someone as an Islamophobe is not to be dismissed or taken likely, especially given CAIR’s nefarious activities and those of its members, employees and directors:

  • The FBI suspended all formal contacts with CAIR due to evidence demonstrating a relationship between CAIR and HAMAS, a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization.
  • In the U.S. v the Holy Land Foundation, the largest successful terrorism financing prosecution in U.S. history, CAIR was identified as a Muslim Brotherhood front group and was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the trial.
  • CAIR opened its first office in Washington, D.C. with the help of a grant from the Holy Land Foundation., a charitable organization that was shut down by the US Treasury Department for funding Jihadist terrorist organizations.
  • In 2014, US ally the United Arab Emirates officially designated CAIR as a terrorist organization.
  • In March 2011, Muthanna al-Hanooti, one of CAIR’s directors, was sentenced to a year in federal prison for violating U.S. sanctions against Saddam’s Iraq.
  • In 2006, the co-founder of CAIR’s parent organization, IAP (Islamic Association for Palestine), Sami Al-Arian, was sentenced to 57 months in prison on terrorism charges for financing Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a designated terrorist organization according to the US State Department.
  • In 2004, CAIR-Northern Virginia director Abdurahman Alamoudi pled guilty to terrorism-related financial and conspiracy charges, which resulted in a 23-year federal prison sentence. Alamoudi was a major financier for Al Qaeda. It’s was John Guandolo’s team that took down Alamoudi.
  • In 2009, Ghassan Elashi, who served as a founding board member for CAIR’s regional chapter in Texas, was sentenced to a total of 65 years in prison after being convicted of 10 counts of conspiracy to provide, and the provision of, material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization; 11 counts of conspiracy to provide, and the provision of, funds, goods and services to a Specially Designated Terrorist; 10 counts of conspiracy to commit, and the commission of, money laundering; one count of conspiracy to impede and impair the Internal Revenue Service (IRS); and two counts of filing a false tax return.
  • Randall Todd (Ismail) Royer, who served as a communications specialist and civil rights coordinator for CAIR, trained with and set up an internet-based newsletter for Lashkar-I-Taiba, an al Qaeda-tied Kashmir organization that is listed on the State Department’s international terror list and was also indicted on charges of conspiring to help al Qaeda and the Taliban battle American troops in Afghanistan and was sentenced to twenty years in prison on April 9, 2004.
  • In September 2003, CAIR’s former Community Affairs Director, Bassem Khafagi, pled guilty to three federal counts of bank and visa fraud and agreed to be deported to Egypt after he had funneled money to activities supporting terrorism and had published material advocating suicide attacks against the United States, illegal activities which took place while he was employed by CAIR.
  • Ann Arbor, Michigan CAIR fundraiser Rabih Haddad was arrested on terrorism-related charges and was deported from the United States due to his work as Executive Director of the Global Relief Foundation, which in October 2002 was designated by the U.S. Treasury Department for financing al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations.

For most citizens of Louisiana, we can be thankful that Understanding the Threat is training our law enforcement heroes about this threat.

New DNC Deputy Keith Ellison’s Islamic Agenda for Congress

keith_ellison_u-s-_house_of_representatives_from_minnesotas_5th_district_01

And he has a plan to make it happen, says former CAIR intern.

Front Page Magazine, by Paul Sperry, March 2, 2017:

Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), the new deputy chairman of the Democratic National Committee, and the first Muslim elected to Congress, has a plan to recruit additional Muslim lawmakers like him — including possible candidates sponsored by a terror-tied Islamist group for which he helped raise millions of dollars, according to a source who once prayed alongside him in the basement of the Capitol.

Ellison has held Friday, or jummah, prayers with other Muslims, including staffers from the Congressional Muslim Staff Association and officials from the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), in a prayer room, or musallah, in the lower level of the Capitol building.

CAIR has been declared a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates and was named by federal prosecutors as an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terrorist-funding operation.

A former CAIR intern who prayed with Ellison says Ellison once boasted that his breaking of the Muslim barrier on the Hill would usher in dozens of other Muslim lawmakers like him, and that he had an election-by-election vision for increasing their ranks.

CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad and intern Chris Gaubatz in 2008 (Courtesy Paul Sperry).

CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad and intern Chris Gaubatz in 2008 (Courtesy Paul Sperry).

“In the summer of 2008, I was working as an intern at CAIR,” Chris Gaubatz recalled in an exclusive interview with FrontPageMagazine.com. “During a Friday prayer at the Capitol Building, Ellison was talking about the second Muslim congressman being elected (Andre Carson) and said, “Insha’allah (Allah willing), next election we will have four Muslim congressman, and insha’allah, after that eight, and insha’allah, after that 16.’ ”

He said he also envisioned a Congressional Muslim Caucus that would rival the Black Caucus in size and influence, and push for “Muslim-friendly public policies,” such as gutting the Patriot Act, criminalizing the profiling of Muslims in terrorism investigations, and preventing the surveillance of mosques.

Ellison’s vision did not play out, as Democrats lost control of Congress to Republicans.

But at Saturday’s DNC elections, Tom Perez, who edged out Ellison as chairman of the committee, broke with party rules and named Ellison deputy chairman, creating a new position at the DNC. The DNC leadership controls spending priorities, organization and messaging for Democrats, as well as influences the recruitment and training of candidates.

“We have to recruit the right kind of candidates,” Ellison asserted in a recent DNC candidate forum.

His new key role in bringing more Muslims into Congress concerns security experts, because Ellison has made anti-Semitic remarks to Muslim groups and aligned himself with known radical Islamists, and would likely recruit more Islamists with help from terrorist front groups like CAIR.
Gaubatz says he expects Ellison’s close relationship with CAIR — he was a frequent visitor at CAIR’s headquarters just three blocks from the Capitol and was treated like an “honorary” CAIR board member — to continue at the DNC.
“He trusts CAIR’s leaders,” he said, “and I have no doubt they will have an influence in the selection and grooming of political candidates for office.”

Known as “CAIR’s congressman,” Ellison has spoken at several CAIR events, including national fundraising dinners held by the group in 2007, 2008 and 2014, when Ellison was awarded the group’s highest honor.

“I personally witnessed Ellison fundraising for CAIR,” said Gaubatz, who shortly after leaving his job at CAIR’s Washington headquarters blew the whistle on a senior CAIR attorney who allegedly defrauded Muslims seeking help with immigration cases out of thousands of dollars.

CAIR, in turn, helped Ellison raise tens of thousands of dollars for his congressional campaigns. Internal CAIR memos obtained by the bestseller, “Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That’s Conspiring to Islamize America,” also show that CAIR provided Ellison “phone sheets” from its database of Muslim voters to help get out the vote for him in his Minneapolis district, which includes a growing Somali community that a federal judge recently warned harbors a large “terrorist cell.”

The FBI has banned CAIR from both national and local outreach activities held by the bureau, pending further investigation into its terrorism ties.

In 2010, Ellison was recorded making anti-Semitic remarks at a 2010 fundraiser hosted by a Virginia Muslim who has praised violent “jihad” against Israel.
Ellison was embroiled in controversy soon after he was first elected in 2006, when he insisted on taking the oath of office with his hand on a copy of the Quran.
Ellison’s office did not respond to requests for comment

A Last, Desperate Plea to Excuse Hamas Support

hamas-pleaIPT NewsJanuary 12, 2017:

As President Obama’s tenure reaches its final days, Islamists in the United States are waging a furious lobbying campaign aimed at securing the freedom of five men convicted of illegally routing millions of dollars to Hamas.

An open campaign urges the president to pardon five former officials from the defunct, Texas-based Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), casting them as victims of “anti-Muslim hysteria” triggered by the 9/11 attacks. In 2008, a jury convicted the five – Shukri Abu Baker, Ghassan Elashi, Mohammed El-Mezain, Abdulrahman Odeh and Mufid Abdulqader – of using a network of Palestinian charities controlled by Hamas to funneling money to the terrorist group.

It is not clear whether the requests to pardon the five, or to commute their sentences and release them from prison, is being considered seriously. Obama’s pardons thus far involved somewhat less serious crimes including fraud, embezzlement and non-violent drug offenses.

But advocates are pushing social media campaigns and online petitions aimed at securing a pardon, or, short of that, a commutation of the five men’s sentences to set them free. The campaign also has enlisted support from at least one member of Congress.

Left unspoken is an undeniable truth behind the pardon/commutation campaign, and behind any ongoing defense of the Holy Land Foundation: Advocates do not believe Hamas support is wrong.

The Muslim Legal Fund of America (MLFA) is leading the charge, supported by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and pro-Palestinian groups.

CAIR’s appeal provided a White House switchboard number for supporters to call and request commutations. Some sites even include contact information for key members of Congress, urging supporters to emphasize the “cruelly disproportionate” length of sentences – from a low of 15 years for El-Mezain, to 65-year terms for Baker and Elashi.

CAIR’s Arizona director Imraan Siddiqi described the prosecution as “a political lynching of charity workers … Its effects still haunt American Muslims.”

After reviewing the entire record in 2011, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals saw it quite differently.

Pleas from the MLFA and Siddiqi ignore the exhibits – many of them internal HLF and related documents – showing the family ties between some defendants and Hamas leaders, a reliance on Hamas officials to speak at HLF fundraisers along with other, consistent pro-Hamas messages.

In addition, records show, HLF (formerly known as the Occupied Land Fund) was part of a network called the “Palestine Committee” in the United States. That committee answered to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood’s mandate that global chapters create “Palestine Committees” in their home countries. Their task was “to support Hamas from abroad,” the Fifth Circuit noted in upholding the convictions and sentences. In the United States, that task fell in part to Hamas political leader Mousa Abu Marzook, who helped create HLF and two other branches – a propaganda wing known as the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP) and a think-tank called the United Association for Studies and Research (UASR).

CAIR was added to the Palestine Committee after its 1994 founding.

“The evidence showed that the long-standing connection between HLF and Hamas began in the late 1980s when HLF arose as a fundraising arm for the Palestine Committee …” the appeals court ruling said. “This fact was notably evident from the … [internal Palestine Committee] documents, which showed that HLF was created along with the IAP.” In addition, Palestine Committee bylaws “specifically recognized HLF as ‘the official organization for fundraising.'”

HLF apologists claim the group was merely interested in helping needy widows and orphans. But, the court pointed out, the orphans included Yehia Ayyash’s children. Ayyash was Hamas’s top bomb maker, nicknamed “The Engineer,” before being killed by Israel.

“An audio tape from 1996 that was seized from HLF’s offices contained songs praising Hamas and discussions of suicide bombers as heroes,” the ruling said.

“We believe that a jury could not help but infer from the above evidence that the defendants had a close association with Hamas and that HLF acted to fund Hamas both before and after Hamas’s designation as a terrorist organization.”

Still, CAIR’s Texas chapter called the five convicted HLF officials “humanitarians,” and described their imprisonment as “an immense wrong.” It cited defense attorney Nancy Hollander’s claim that there was no evidence showing her client, HLF executive director Shukri Abu Baker, breaking the law. “Not a word from his lips that he hated Jews. Not a word from his lips that he supported Hamas. These were fictions,” Hollander said.

1933That cannot be said for Mufid Abdulqader, who performed and acted in a singing troupe that helped raise money for HLF at IAP events. In this video, admitted into evidence during the 2008 trial, he is shown wearing camouflage and a kaffiyeh as he sings, “I am Hamas, O dear ones … I swear to wipe out the name of the Zionist. And protect my land, Palestine.” Then, he pretends to strangle an actor portraying an Israeli.

Hollander failed to mention that Baker ran HLF and was responsible for who spoke and what was said at its fundraisers. Those events routinely featured Hamas leaders and activists. She also neglected to mention her client’s participation in a secret 1993 Philadelphia gathering of Hamas members and supporters who schemed about how to “derail” the U.S.-brokered Oslo peace accord without coming off looking like terror supporters.

It was Baker who set a key ground rule for the talks, which were secretly recorded and translated by the FBI: No one should mention Hamas by name, he instructed. Instead, call it “Sister Samah,” which is Hamas spelled backward.

The gathering, Baker said, was “a joint workshop between the Holy Land Foundation and the IAP.” Participants should not mention Hamas by name.

Hollander then compared the HLF case – brought against a handful of men with documented and recorded connections to Hamas – to the mass internment of 117,000 Japanese American men, women and children during World War II.

The current campaign would settle for a sentencing commutation, essentially freeing the men on time served. The sentences, from 15 to 65 years in prison, were overly harsh, advocates say.

But the Fifth Circuit had considered this, too, rejecting defense department arguments. Its ruling noted that the probation office’s presentence recommendations included significant terrorism enhancements because HLF gave money to Hamas “in order to rid Palestine of the Jewish people through violent jihad, HAMAS’ mission.”

It added that “the trial was replete with evidence to satisfy application of the terrorism enhancement because of the defendants’ intent to support Hamas. The Hamas charter clearly delineated the goal of meeting the Palestinian/Israeli conflict with violent jihad and the rejection of peace efforts and compromise solutions. The defendants knew that they were supporting Hamas, as there was voluminous evidence showing their close ties to the Hamas movement.”

Those claiming the HLF defendants suffered an injustice, or that they somehow deserve relief, lie about this record or pretend it does not exist. To acknowledge reality is to shatter their own argument, or to come clean about their true feelings about Hamas terrorism. They know that’s a losing hand. It’s something Shukri Abu Baker talked about in that 1993 Philadelphia meeting.

They need to mislead people if they are going to be successful, Baker said.

“War is deception,” he said. “Deceive, camouflage, pretend that you’re leaving while you’re walking that way … Deceive your enemy.”

Jihadist Groups in the US: What Next?

Gatestone Institute, by Benjamin Weingarten, February 9, 2017:

  • Meanwhile, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) continues freely to operate in America. In the wee hours of election night 2016, in fact, its Los Angeles office leader called for the overthrow of the U.S. government.
  • The Trump administration has stated its commitment to fighting Islamic supremacism, including the Muslim Brotherhood itself.

To what lengths would America’s leaders go to protect a group that the United Arab Emirates (UAE) deemed a terrorist organization?

A bombshell new report from the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) reveals the alarming answer.

It involves a man who in his almost 50 years of public life has done more for America’s enemies — first of the Communist variety and later of the jihadist brand — than perhaps any other: Iran lobbyist-in-chief John Kerry.

In the most recent case, he did so in secret, apparently well aware of the political consequences of exposing the potentially catastrophic policy he was pursuing to the light of day.

As IPT’s report details, Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Muslim American Society (MAS) were classified as terrorist groups by the UAE in 2014, as two of the 83 entities identified as such for their ties to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood.

(Image source: Courtesy of the Investigative Project on Terrorism)

Furious at such a charge, CAIR pushed Secretary of State Kerry to lobby on its behalf. Kerry’s State Department reportedly complied, meeting with UAE officials regularly to plead CAIR’s case.

State signaled such a stance publicly almost from day one. As IPT notes:

At a daily State Department press briefing two days after UAE released its list, a spokesman said that State does not “consider CAIR or MAS to be terrorist groups” but that it was seeking more information from UAE about their decision. He added that “as part of our routine engagement with a broad spectrum of faith based organizations, a range of U.S. government officials have met with officials of CAIR and MAS. We at the State Department regularly meet with a wide range of faith based groups to hear their views even if some of their views expressed at times are controversial.”

“Controversial” is an interesting way of describing the views of a group that makes common cause with jihadists and jihadist sympathizers. There is an irony, as IPT recounts:

Just days before the UAE’s 2014 designation of CAIR as a terrorist group in the organization’s San Francisco chapter bestowed its “Promoting Justice” award to Sami Al-Arian and his family. Al-Arian secretly ran an American support network for the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) terrorist group in the late 1980s and early 1990s. PIJ was responsible for terrorist attacks which killed dozens of Israelis and several Americans.

CAIR’s jihadi ties are numerous and longstanding, involving not only the links of its founders and present leaders to Hamas, and as critics say, apologists for Islamic terrorism, but also for impeding counterterrorism efforts. Lawyers in a class-action lawsuit representing the family of slain former FBI counterterrorism official John P. O’Neill — who perished in the 9/11 attacks at the World Trade Center — named CAIR part of a criminal conspiracy to promote “radical Islamic terrorism,” and declared that CAIR has

“actively sought to hamper governmental anti-terrorism efforts by direct propaganda activities aimed at police, first-responders, and intelligence agencies through so-called sensitivity training. Their goal is to create as much self-doubt, hesitation, fear of name-calling, and litigation within police departments and intelligence agencies as possible so as to render such authorities ineffective in pursuing international and domestic terrorist entities.”

More directly, as jihad expert Daniel Pipes noted in a 2014 expose, “At least seven board members or staff at CAIR have been arrested, denied entry to the U.S., or were indicted on or pled guilty to (or were convicted of) terrorist charge.”

Because of the litany of actions that CAIR has taken on behalf of and in association with Islamic supremacists — as was unearthed during the Holy Land Foundation trial, which represented the largest terror financing case in U.S. history and in which CAIR was named as an unindicted co-conspirator — back in 2008 the FBI officially ceased contact with the group.

During the Obama years, however, groups like CAIR were embraced under the jihad-enabling “countering violent extremism” (CVE) paradigm. CVE outsourced “de-radicalization” efforts to “peaceful Islamist,” Muslim Brotherhood-tied groups. CVE was the antithesis of the comprehensive counterjihadist program America required.

With respect to John Kerry’s efforts on behalf of CAIR in particular, the story gets worse:

In December 2014, CAIR met with top officials of the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Justice Department, asking them to pressure the UAE to remove them from the list, according to reliable sources intimately familiar with the communications. On December 22, 2014, CAIR issued a press release asserting that “the two American Muslim organizations and the U.S. government pledged to work together to achieve a positive solution to the UAE designations.”

In response to a letter sent by CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad sent to Secretary Kerry protesting the UAE designation, Kerry responded on May 5, 2015 in a letter to Awad stating, “Let me reiterate, first, that the U.S. government clearly does not consider CAIR to be a terrorist organization. As your letter noted, the Department of State rejected this allegation immediately after the UAE designations were announced in November, and we will continue to do so….U.S. officials have raised the issue of CAIR’s inclusion on the UAE’s terror list with UAE officials on multiple occasions…”

That portion of the letter now appears on CAIR’s website. But at the time that the letter was sent to CAIR, according to knowledgeable sources, there was an agreement between CAIR and the State Department to keep the letter secret. An excerpt from it was posted on CAIR’s website only in May 2016, a year after it was received. The IPT has learned that Kerry and CAIR made this agreement to keep the letter secretto protect Kerry from public embarrassment. In light of CAIR’s numerous ties to Hamas and other unsavory aspects of its record, Kerry had good reason to believe that the letter could cause a public relations disaster for him.

Kerry’s efforts proved unsuccessful; the UAE did not budge.

The lifelong leftist enabler of America’s foes, whose public career commenced with propagandistic testimony to the U.S. Senate on the Vietnam War, redounding to the Communist’s benefit, and closed with his support for Islamists including CAIR — not to mention the mullahs in Iran — never paid a price for such efforts.

Meanwhile, CAIR continues freely to operate in America. In the wee hours of election night 2016, in fact, its Los Angeles office leader called for the overthrow of the U.S. government.

The Trump administration has stated its commitment to “eradicating” Islamic supremacism, including challenging the Muslim Brotherhood itself, which represents the tip of the Sunni jihadist spear. This stance is reflected not only in policy speeches delivered during the presidential campaign, but in the testimony, past public remarks and actions of the principal members of President Trump’s National Security Council.

The Muslim Brotherhood may very may very well come under scrutiny in the near-term, as will the efforts of those who oppose the group, as Senator Ted Cruz has re-upped a bill that calls upon the Secretary of State to submit a report on its designation as a foreign terrorist organization.

That bill’s text provides helpful background on just why it is that the Muslim Brotherhood deserves such a classification, noting:

  • The many countries that have declared the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization or barred it from operating
  • The explicit calls for violent jihad, with the end goal of imposing Islamic law over all the world of the group’s founder and spiritual leader Hassan al-Banna, and the consistently violent Islamic supremacist content of the Brotherhood’s core membership texts
  • The terrorist efforts of numerous jihadist groups explicitly tied to the Muslim Brotherhood, and the efforts of individual Muslim Brotherhood members designated as terrorists by the U.S. government themselves
  • The litany of terrorist financing cases involving the Muslim Brotherhood, including the aforementioned Holy Land Foundation case, whereby:

Department of Justice officials successfully argued in court that the international Muslim Brotherhood and its United States affiliates had engaged in a widespread conspiracy to raise money and materially support the terrorist group Hamas. HLF officials charged in the case were found guilty on all counts in November 2008, primarily related to millions of dollars that had been transferred to Hamas. During the trial and in court documents, Federal prosecutors implicated a number of prominent United States-Islamic organizations in this conspiracy, including the Islamic Society of North America [ISNA], the North American Islamic Trust [NAIT], and the Council on American-Islamic Relations [CAIR]. These groups and their leaders, among others, were named as unindicted co-conspirators in the case.

According to a July 2008 Justice Department court filing:

“The mandate of these organizations [ISNA, NAIT and CAIR], per the International Muslim Brotherhood, was to support HAMAS, and the HLF’s particular role was to raise money to support HAMAS’ organizations inside the Palestinian territories.”

Should the Trump administration challenge the Muslim Brotherhood, it is reasonable to think that it may threaten its offshoots, one of which is the very Islamic organization in CAIR that the Obama administration specifically sought to protect.

Should CAIR come under fire, it is a safe bet that the Left will close ranks, arguing that conservatives are on a witch hunt akin to the Red Scare to snuff out peaceful Muslims in America.

Those who wish to triumph over the global jihad must challenge this narrative fearlessly.

The argument against CAIR and similar groups is simply this: If you aid, abet or enable to jihadists, you will be prosecuted, and swiftly. You are standing with those who wish to kill innocent Americans, and the government’s first job is to protect the life and limb of its citizens.

Efforts to rid America of jihadists, shut down their funding networks and punish those who give them aid and comfort are about defending the homeland against a subversive ideology of conquest that seeks to undermine our Constitutional system and supplant it with a totalitarian one based in Islamic law, Sharia.

“Liberals” or “Progressives” might seek to use CAIR as a cudgel to argue that “conservatives” wish to trample on the rights of Muslims. The task of the rest of us will be to expose a supposed civil liberties group as a cleverly-designed front for a theocratic, political Islamic supremacist movement that seeks to overtake the civil liberties of all Americans.

That is all the more reason why it is important to bring it to light.

***

 

Gaffney: Sanctuary Cities Are ‘Magnet’ for Illegals, Don’t Make Us Safer

AP

AP

Breitbart, by John Hayward, February 1, 2017:

Frank Gaffney, Center for Security Policy president, praised President Trump’s first Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch, on Wednesday’sBreitbart News Daily.

“He seems like a most impressive man,” Gaffney told SiriusXM host Alex Marlow.

Following a clip Marlow played, Gaffney said, “The law is not my area of expertise, needless to say – but he, I believe, has epitomized over his distinguished career an approach to judicial practice which that clip you just ran spoke to: that it is not the role of judges to make the law. It is to apply the law, to assure the equitable application of the law.”

“That’s a refreshing change from what we’ve been seeing a lot of from the bench, including the Supreme Court, of late,” Gaffney continued, “a necessary corrective, especially in regards to replacing one of the most eminent, most capable, and most important checks on that practice, namely Antonin Scalia, who Judge Gorsuch is being called to replace on the Supreme Court, of course.”

Marlow asked Gaffney about the spectacle of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) throwing Breitbart News reporter Neil Munro out of an event that was supposedly dedicated to “tolerance” and “inclusion.”

“A couple of quick points on this, Alex,” Gaffney said. “One, among the governments that has tied the Council on American-Islamic Relations, CAIR, to terrorism is the United States government. In fact, in the Holy Land Foundation trial – 2007-2008, largest terrorism financing trial in the country’s history – CAIR was identified by an FBI agent, based upon wiretaps conducted by the FBI back in the day when it did that sort of thing, of a meeting. It turned out to be the founding meeting of this organization CAIR, and it involved representatives of a group the Brotherhood itself has identified as a part of their organizations, the Islamic Association for Palestine, on the one hand, and representatives of Hamas. What the federal government contends in court, and four different federal judges affirmed, was that CAIR is Hamas.”

“So there’s that. And then there’s this point that you’ve made, and I think it’s apt, that the most intolerant people on the planet, bar none, are the jihadists – who seek often in this country, doing business as the Muslim Brotherhood, the parent organization of Hamas, including the Council on American-Islamic Relations, that everybody must be very tolerant of them,” he continued.

“It’s absurd. It’s obscene. And unfortunately, to the extent that these guys have gotten away with it for this long, under, I’m sorry to say, Republican and Democratic administrations, they have managed to become influential in our policy-making process, to the point where we are largely, willfully, blind to the real threat that they represent,” he warned.

“So yes, I do hope that this is another of the things that Donald Trump will attend to here shortly, namely designating the Muslim Brotherhood as what it is: a terrorist organization, which I hope will speak volumes about the Council on American-Islamic Relations and other front groups operating in this country under its banner,” he said.

Marlow referenced Dr. Zuhdi Jasser’s appearance on Breitbart News Daily the previous day, in which he denounced the Left’s use of Muslims as pawns in its identity-politics games.

“Zuhdi’s a remarkable man, and I am very proud to have him as a friend,” Gaffney said. “I think he’s absolutely right about that. I think the corollary, of course, is that the Islamists are using the Left, as well. They’re using them as cover for what is, according to the Muslim Brotherhood’s own secret plan – written back in 1991 as a report to Cairo, the mothership, the headquarters, not meant for our eyes, called the ‘Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal of the Group.’ People can go look at it, download it for free at SecureFreedom.org. It is a fascinating read.”

“What it makes very clear is the Muslim Brotherhood’s mission in our country is destroying Western civilization from within, by the hands of what you might call the infidels,” he said. “Among the infidels that are most helpful to them, if you’re trained as I was in fighting the old Soviet Communists, think of them as ‘useful idiots’ or ‘useful infidels,’ the term that Daniel Pipes has coined. But whatever they are, they are helping the Islamists in their efforts to take us down, and the Islamists are helping the Left in doing just that. They have a very different vision of what should come next, of course, but they are making common cause.

“And it is bizarre, since among the pillars of the Left, let’s recall, are groups like feminists – as we saw in the streets of Washington and elsewhere recently – and Jews, and homosexuals, and people of various minority faiths, people who leave their faiths. These are all, especially Muslims, regarded as, you know, the enemy by this so-called ‘Religion of Peace.’” he pointed out.

“I want to emphasize, there are people like Zuhdi Jasser who don’t agree with this, that don’t practice sharia, as we’ve talked about often, that animates this very intolerant, misogynistic, and anti-Semitic, and anti-American, anti-constitutional program of the Islamists. But it is really appalling that the Left is helping, in so many ways, normalize and socialize and otherwise advance this toxically anti-American agenda. It’s what we see, of course, most immediately in this effort by Donald Trump to stop – these are my words, but I think this is what it is, at the end of the day – to stop importing more jihadists into the United States. The vast majority of the American people support it,” Gaffney said.

Marlow moved to the subject of President Trump’s executive order on immigration by playing a comment from House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi to the effect that “sanctuary cities” enhance American security because they attract a large number of illegal aliens who can serve as confidential informants to the police when other illegal aliens commit crimes.

“I think what we’re watching is an effort to defy common sense,” Gaffney commented. “Most of us who have common sense recognize that bringing more people into this country who aren’t just violent jihadists who want to blow things up, or shoot people, or rape people for that matter…I’m just worried, frankly, as I said earlier, about the people who have been engaged in what I think of as kind of ‘pre-violence’: the sharia supremacists who seek to build the infrastructure that supports a violent kind of jihad, that insists that people don’t assimilate into our country, don’t become like Zuhdi Jasser, part of the American fabric and dream.”

“They’re a problem, and we don’t need more of them,” he contended. “I think that’s what Donald Trump is trying to do with his pause and trying to assess how do we enhance our vetting process? How do we keep those kinds of people out?”

Gaffney said that goal was “eminently sensible” and scoffed at the efforts of people like Pelosi to “cast themselves as the people who are protecting us by preventing the police from being able to identify and remove folks as part of an overall law-enforcement effort, who are engaged in that kind of behavior.”

“To suggest that somehow we’re all going to be safer if we actually keep the magnet for people coming here illegally – some of whom, I have to say, are engaged in probably actual or pre-terrorist activity – this is a ridiculous position to strike,” he said. “I think Donald Trump is absolutely right to insist that we shut down these sanctuary cities, that we insist that our cities and our states enforce the law, not undermine it to possibly great detriment of public safety and even the national security.”

Skirt-Wearing Jihadi Sherifa Zuhur Exemplifies the Battle Ahead for America

Understanding the Threat, by John  Guandolo, January 30, 2017:

UTT had an interesting exchange on twitter this weekend with Sherifa Zuhur, an apologist for America’s enemies – specifically, terrorist organizations.

screen-shot-2017-01-30-at-12-57-51-am-768x440

Amid the social upheaval in response to President Trump’s travel ban from seven Islamic countries, fomented by the hard left Marxist/socialist groups and their anti-American counterparts – jihadi groups like Hamas (doing business as CAIR), ISNA, and others – UTT feels it is important to share this experience publicly because Americans need to know what they are up against and what to expect as this war in America goes forward.

The exchange began in response to UTT’s (@UTT_USA) tweet:  “No surprise – SecState Madeleine Albright sides w/ our enemy & not America…”  Albright publicly stated she is ready to register as a Muslim in response to President Trump’s call to ban Muslim immigration into the United States from certain nations.

UTT’s Vice President Chris Gaubatz received a response from Zuhur (@SherifaZuhur) which read:  “Chris, Muslims aren’t your enemy,” to whit Mr. Gaubatz (@CAIRvGaubatz) responded with: “Agreed; only Muslims that adhere to Quran & Sunnah as embodied in the shariah.”

Zuhur then responded with: “Then that’s all of us.”

Your words not ours Ms. Zuhur, but thanks for making UTT’s point that it is a requirement for all Muslims to adhere to sharia which calls for jihad until the entire world is under Islamic rule.

UTT does not teach all Muslims are the enemy of the United States.  However, 100% of our enemy in the Global Islamic Movement state they are Muslims waging jihad to establish a global Islamic state (caliphate) under sharia.  The delineating factor is sharia.  Not every person who self-identifies as a Muslim wants to live under sharia or follow sharia, but 100% of our enemy in this war does.  100% of authoritative sharia obliges jihad, and defines jihad as “warfare against non-muslims.”  The problem is two-fold: (1) Any Muslim who does not want to follow sharia can decide to follow sharia at any time – especially when threatened with violence from other Muslims;  (2)  Sharia obliges Muslims to lie if the goal is obligatory, and jihad is obligatory.

Therein lies the problem – there is simply no way to determine which Muslims are our friends and which are not.  In fact, the only Muslims who are potential friends of the United States are those who do not follow the Quran and Sunnah, as embodied in the sharia, which makes Ms. Zuhur’s reply all the more telling. 

UTT would not waste your time in sharing this exchange if that were the end of the story.

Dr. Sherifa Zuhur is not just some random Muslim on twitter who defends sharia and designated terrorist groups.  Zuhur is a former professor (2006-2009) at the U.S. Army War College’s Strategic Studies Institute who continues to be accepted in academic circles and was recently at the University of California at Berkley.

In April of 2008, Zuhur published a monograph called, “Precision in the Global War on Terror: Inciting Muslims through the War of Ideas.”  In this publication, Zuhur warns against attacking the ideology of groups like Al Qaeda, the Taliban, Salafists, and the Muslim Brotherhood because that would necessarily be attacking Islamic ideology.

Exactly.  In this regard, UTT agrees because Al Qaeda, the Taliban, Boko Haram, ISIS, the Muslim Brotherhood, and all jihadi organizations on the planet draw their doctrine from sharia.  It is the basis for why they act – and they tell us so.  And so does Dr. Zuhur.

Sharia does not exist in a vacuum.  Sharia comes from the Quran and the Sunnah, and last time UTT checked, the Quran and Sunnah are wholly Islamic.  As we say at UTT – it’s all about sharia.

The following are direct quotes (in bold) from Dr. Zuhur’s monograph followed by UTT’s comments:

“To restore justice, Muslims want the shari`ah, Islamic law, to be implemented and that, in turn, must be utilized with justice. This contrasts with radicals who think that violence is the only means to secure real social and political change, even if they also are motivated to implement shari`ah.”

The Global Islamic Movement has many lines of operations including suit/skirt wearing jihadis like ISNA, CAIR, ICNA, MAS, MSA, Dr. Zuhur and others who point to the violent jihadis and say something to the effect of “Well, at least we are not Al Qaeda or ISIS. We’re moderates.”  The violent jihadis use their attacks and threats to drive weak Western leaders/nations into the arms of the suit/skirt-wearing jihadis.

“Bin Ladin and Zawahiri generally refer to bona fide religious concepts. But, my point is that Sayyid Qutb possessed religious and philosophical credentials that should not be ignored. To blame him for global jihad is a convenient way of discounting the impact of other salafists (from the Wahhabist sect), and further implying that the violent radical leaders who followed him read or understood his earlier proposal that an Islamic society could be created through a “social revolution” and education. It is also a significant way of discrediting the Muslim Brotherhood.”

Not much comment needed here.  Dr. Zuhur admits the leaders of Al Qaeda are correctly sighting sharia in furtherance of what they are doing.  In addition, neither Al Qaeda nor ISIS have misquoted sharia in furtherance of their actions.

“To bin Ladin, the Muslim-only policy at Mecca and Medina extends to the entire country of Saudi Arabia, indeed to the entire Arabian peninsula. What policymakers should understand is that quite a number of other Muslims agree with bin Ladin’s views.”

Many muslims do agree with the views and objectives of Osama bin Laden as well as ISIS, the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamic organizations/groups, because these are commands from allah repeated by their prophet Mohammad as “perfect” behavior for all Muslims to follow.  Did we mention Al Qaeda is a terrorist organization?

“U.S. Government agencies, the defense community, and security research centers have made far too much of the Caliphate. By denouncing it, they are trouncing on Muslims’ idealized history and institutions.”

Muslims who want a caliphate here in the United States – which according to Dr. Zuhur is all Muslims – are enemies of the United States.  America is a Constitutional Republic and Americans will keep it using all means necessary.  Muslims who want to live under a caliphate can go to sharia-governed lands in ISIS-held territory.  Working to establish one here is a violation of federal law, and an act that constitutes war against our Constitution and way of life.

“Those media spokespersons most often vilifying terrorists with the label “Islamofascist” often go on to identify this phenomenon with those who wish to follow shari`ah (Islamic law) and live within a Caliphate, as if these two very important Islamic institutions are proof of poisonous terror and fascism. The overwhelming majority of Muslims would disagree with this vilification of their holy law and historic form of government.”

Since ALL jihadi organizations (Al Qaeda, ISIS, the MB, et al) continue to state publicly and in their internal documents their end goal is a global caliphate under sharia law and that it must be achieved via any means possible including political warfare and violence, and since Dr. Zuhur is defending that position, how are rational readers able to discern between Dr. Zuhur’s position and ISIS’s position?

“Apostasy is a crime pertaining only to Muslims. It should not—according to classical interpretations of Islamic law—be prosecuted unless the apostate admits his denial of faith. In other words, accusations of apostasy are not supposed to discourage Muslim opinion and expression.”

Sharia states the punishment for apostasy is death and the former professor at the U.S. Army War College agrees it should be prosecuted as such.

“The actions of the American organization, the Council on American- Islamic Relations, which seeks to protect Muslims from discrimination or violence, have been labeled “a cover for terrorism,” and so on. This allows for conflation of anti-Americanism, and Arab non-salafi groups with Islamist, and violent Islamist groups.”

This is utter nonsense.  CAIR is Hamas.  Hamas is a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization by the United States Government. 

Dr. Zuhur is one of a long line of jihadis and jihadi apologists in the military university system and on U.S. campuses teaching “Middle East Studies” and related topic.

Is it any wonder that, with professors like Dr. Zuhur, the U.S. national security apparatus, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff under the Bush and Obama administration never identified our enemy, or even took the time to study the enemy threat doctrine –  sharia?

Should we be surprised that Dr. Zuhur has sided with the Al Qaeda, ISIS, or the Muslim Brotherhood – specifically Hamas (dba CAIR) – in opposing President Trump’s ban on immigration from seven Islamic countries?

We at UTT are not surprised, and you should not be either.  It is important for Americans to understand that as President Trump, his cabinet, and the U.S. national security apparatus begin to dismantle the jihadi network here in the US, they will be opposed by the hard left Marxist/socialist groups, their allies in the media, and by the jihadis themselves.

There will be more crying Senators on television, hard-left/jihadi marches in the street funded by our enemies, and demonstrations allegedly about equal rights and equal treatment but actually excuses for violence, upheaval and revolution.

DULLES, VA - JANUARY 28: J.D. People protest and welcome arriving passengers at Dulles International Airport in Virginia, January 28, 2017. The protest follows the executive order of President Donald Trump to bar all refugees coming to the US and Muslims from seven countries. (Photo by Astrid Riecken For The Washington Post via Getty Images)

DULLES, VA – JANUARY 28: J.D. People protest and welcome arriving passengers at Dulles International Airport in Virginia, January 28, 2017. The protest follows the executive order of President Donald Trump to bar all refugees coming to the US and Muslims from seven countries. (Photo by Astrid Riecken For The Washington Post via Getty Images)

Americans must know this is coming, get educated and get prepared.  Support the bold leaders in the new administration and beware of the establishment types who are already coming to the defense of our enemies.

This war will be won at the local level.  Educate your elected officials and hold them accountable.  Ensure your pastors speak truthfully about this threat and begin educating their flocks.  Encourage your law enforcement leaders to get trained by UTT so they can map out the jihadi networks in their area and dismantle them, proactively find jihadis in your neighborhood, and defeat this enemy from the ground up.

Muslim Brotherhood Ally Falsely Smears Senator to Block Terror Designation Bill

  (CQ Roll Call via AP Images)


(CQ Roll Call via AP Images)

Washington Free Beacon, by Adam Kredo, January 27, 2017:

An Islamic organization long accused of being part of the Muslim Brotherhood’s network in America has been caught trading in lies as part of an effort to ensure the Brotherhood is not designated as a terrorist entity in the United States, according to information obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

The Council on American Islamic Relations, or CAIR, a Muslim advocacy group that was named by the U.S. government as part of a vast network supporting the terror group Hamas, recently launched an effort to block a bill that would formally designated the Muslim Brotherhood as a terror organization. Many other countries, including Israel and Egypt, have already approved similar legislation.

In its efforts to block the bill and smear Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas), the senator spearheading the designation effort, CAIR recently claimed that the bill “was written by a disgraced former FBI agent who has made a career out of bashing Muslims and Islam,” according to a CAIR press release.

CAIR officials claimed that this purported revelation stains the reputations of Cruz and former Congresswoman Michele Bachmann (R., Minn.), who helped draft the original bill.

“The fact that Senator Cruz’s current legislation has its origins in the conspiracy theories of a notorious Islamophobe serves to prove that the bill is designed as the basis for an anti-Muslim witch hunt, not as a legitimate defense of national security,” CAIR Government Affairs Director Robert McCaw said earlier this week.

The Free Beacon can now disclose that CAIR’s claims are false and that John Guandolo, the former FBI agent named by CAIR as the bill’s primary architect, played no role in crafting the legislation, according to sources with direct knowledge of the situation

“In response to the false claims of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) claiming that former FBI Agent John Guandolo was responsible for drafting my 2014 bill calling for the designation of the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization, I can state absolutely that Mr. Guandolo had nothing to do with the drafting of the bill, nor did anyone from my office seek his input,” Bachmann exclusively told the Free Beacon.

“Unable to address the findings of the bill, CAIR is engaged in a transparent attempt to attack this effort through smears and guilt by association,” Bachmann said.

When presented with Bachmann’s denial, CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper moved to distance his group from the false claims, telling the Free Beacon, “Please contact [news website] WorldNetDaily. They made the claim.”

This, too, appears to be untrue. The original press release specifically attributes the information to CAIR.

“The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation’s largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization, today revealed that the original draft of Sen. Ted Cruz’s (R-TX) controversial ‘Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act’ was written by a disgraced former FBI agent who has made a career out of bashing Muslims and Islam,” the group wrote.

CAIR’s Hooper did not respond to further Free Beacon requests for comment on whether the organization would retract its claims and provide an apology to the lawmakers in light of new information from Bachmann.

CAIR has long attempted to distance itself from its alleged role in a massive terrorism case by the U.S. government against the now defunct Holy Land Foundation, which was found to be funneling money to Hamas terrorists in support of the Muslim Brotherhood’s network in America.

CAIR was identified as an unindicted co-conspirator in the case by the Department of Justice.

David Reaboi, a national security expert and political warfare consultant, told the Free Beacon that CAIR’s main drive is to stop the Muslim Brotherhood from being designated as a terror group.

“As the debate on the Brotherhood heats up, Americans shouldn’t be surprised to see those who’ve argued for decades that Hamas isn’t a terrorist group are also adamant that the Muslim Brotherhood isn’t one either,” Reaboi said.

“Designating the Muslim Brotherhood could do more to dismantle the infrastructure of Islamic terrorism in this country than any other single move by the Trump administration,” he said. “The Muslim Brothers have been involved in some way in nearly every U.S. material support for terror prosecution in the last several decades. That’s one reason why the Brotherhood’s allies in America have worked tirelessly to fight the government’s ability to stop those who give support to terrorist groups, too.”

CAIR: Cruz’s Muslim Brotherhood Bill Not About Terrorism

Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. (Photo: Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images)

Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. (Photo: Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images)

IPT, by John Rossomando  •  Jan 26, 2017

Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz’s bill seeking to classify the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group is discriminatory leaders of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) claimed at a press conference Wednesday.

“We believe it has little to do with national security or terrorism,” CAIR’s spokesman Ibrahim Hooper said.

He sees Cruz’s bill as part of a two-step strategy to designate the Muslim Brotherhood and attack groups and their leaders who “Islamophobes have falsely labeled as linked to the Muslim Brotherhood.”

Hard evidence, however, links CAIR and other American Islamist groups to the Brotherhood.

A phone book introduced at 2008 Holy Land Foundation (HLF) Hamas fundraising trial revealed that CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad and fellow CAIR co-founder Omar Ahmad belonged to the Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee. This committee came into existence as part of the Muslim Brotherhood’s plan to support Hamas in America.

U.S. District Judge Jorge Solis noted in a 2009 ruling that the HLF trial evidence provided “at least a prima facie case as to CAIR’s involvement in a conspiracy to support Hamas.”

Awad defended the Muslim Brotherhood at the press conference, saying it has been “part in parcel of the democratic process” that it believes in democracy. Banning it for ideological reasons “is nothing short of shooting ourselves in the foot as the biggest democracy or the strongest democracy in the world,” Awad said.

Cruz’s bill would direct the secretary of state to tell Congress whether the Muslim Brotherhood meets the criteria for designation as a foreign terrorist organization. President Trump reportedly is considering an executive order accomplishing the bill’s objectives.

CAIR also protested Trump’s proposed executive order curtailing immigration and visas from majority Muslim countries such as Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Yemen and Iran. With the exception of Iran, all of these countries have barely functioning central governments and are in the midst of raging civil wars. It also contested President Trump’s order halting the processing of Syrian refugees and ordering the creation of safe zones inside Syria for them.

Awad cast the orders as anti-Muslim and bigoted.

“Never before in our country’s history have we purposely as a matter of policy imposed a ban on immigrants or refugees on the basis of religion or imposed a litmus test on those coming to this nation,” Awad said. “The orders will tarnish our image in the Muslim world, making us seem uncaring and hard-hearted.”

It’s not exactly without precedent. Early 20th century immigration laws barred those belonging to ideological subversives and polygamists from coming to the U.S. Ottoman authorities protested the latter for curtailing Muslim immigration to the United States.

Huffington Post Claims Key Evidence Against MB “Discredited.” A Federal Court Said Otherwise.

cair-terrorists-uae-ip

One piece of evidence presented by Justice Department prosecutors to the court went uncontested by the defense. There’s plenty more to back it up.

CounterJihad, by Paul Sperry, January 20, 2017:

The Huffington Post is not known for rigorous research and reporting, but its standards hit a new low last week when it tried to discredit an internal Muslim Brotherhood document calling for “a grand jihad” against the U.S. in an attempt to derail proposed legislation designating the group as a terrorist organization.

In a lengthy Jan. 13 article, “Ted Cruz vs. The Muslim Brotherhood Boogeyman,” HuffPo falsely claimed the Brotherhood document — “An Explanatory Memorandum: On the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America” — has been “discredited.” In fact, the memo was entered as prosecutorial evidence in federal court in the largest terrorist-financing case in US history, and the defense did not contest it.

The 18-page document is one of several pieces of evidence underpinning a bill reintroduced last week by Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, requiring the State Department to consider designating the Muslim Brotherhood, along with its front groups, as a “foreign terrorist organization.” The “Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act” has several prominent co-sponsors in the Senate, while a companion bill has attracted 71 co-sponsors in the House, including two Democrats.

Several years ago, the U.S. Justice Department submitted the Brotherhood memo as a key piece of evidence — “Exhibit 3-85” — in its successful prosecution of the Holy Land Foundation, a charitable front group established by the Muslim Brotherhood to support Hamas terrorists, and its authenticity has never been in dispute. In fact, even lawyers for the defendants agreed the document was legitimate. .

In that 2008 terrorism case, which ended with guilty verdicts on all 108 counts, the government proved that the US-based Muslim charity was helping the Muslim Brotherhood funnel more than $12 million to Hamas, the Palestinian branch of the Brotherhood. The Holy Land Foundation verdict has survived two court appeals.

The HuffPo article, authored by national reporter Christopher Mathias (christopher.mathias@huffingtonpost.com), studiously avoids mentioning the Holy Land Foundation case while questioning the merits of the memo.

This is an egregious and inexplicable oversight. Using the “Explanatory Memorandum” along with other of the Brotherhood’s own internal records, federal prosecutors further demonstrated that the Egypt-based Brotherhood operates a secret network of front groups inside America that are conspiring to carry out “a grand jihad to eliminate and destroy Western civilization from within.” In addition to the Holy Land Foundation, the memo lists more than two dozen American Muslim groups the Brotherhood uses as cut-outs to infiltrate and “sabotage” the US government with the long-range goal of turning it into an Islamic state.

The Justice Department, in turn, listed these and other US-based Brotherhood front groups as unindicted co-conspirators in what was revealed to be a massive criminal scheme to provide material support to Hamas terrorists. Chief among them are the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT).

While HuffPo would have the public believe these groups are “peaceful,” the government has fingered them as dangerous agents in a subversive plot to Islamize the United States. Introduced in federal court as Exhibit 3-85, the government stated that the “Explanatory Memo” “described the Brotherhood’s strategic goal as a kind of ‘grand jihad’ ” against America.

Damning as it is, the ”memo,” dated May 22, 1991, is just the tip of the iceberg of evidence showing the Brotherhood runs a conspiracy network to take down the US system of government. It was seized by FBI agents along with some 75 boxes of Muslim Brotherhood archival material during a 2004 raid of the Annandale, Va., home of a suspected Hamas terrorist and Muslim Brotherhood figure, Ismail Elbarasse, aka Abdul Hassan, aka Abd el Hassan.

Yet HuffPo claims such hard, government-certified evidence amounts to an “anti-Muslim conspiracy theory.”

It even tried to suggest the “Explanatory Memo” does not carry much authoritative weight because its author “does not appear to have been a significant player in the Muslim Brotherhood.” In fact, the government described the author, Mohamed Akram Adlouni, as a “US-Muslim Brotherhood Shura Council member,” which means he was part of the governing body of the Brotherhood’s secret North American network. The memo, moreover, “was approved by the Shura Council.”

More astounding, HuffPo turned to a group cited in Brotherhood documents as a member organization — the Council on American-Islamic Relations — to help pooh-pooh the government’s assertion that such outwardly moderate Muslim groups in the US are secretly hellbent on committing “civilization jihad” on behalf of the Brotherhood, as if CAIR were a credible and objective source on the subject.

It quoted CAIR denying any links to the Muslim Brotherhood, even though the Justice Department identified CAIR and its founder Omar Ahmad as “individuals/entities who are and/or were members of the US Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee and/or its organizations,” while designating both of them as unindicted co-conspirators” in the Holy Land Foundation case.

Ahmad attended a 1993 meeting at a Philadelphia hotel, secretly recorded by the FBI, “where leaders of the organizations under the Muslim Brotherhood umbrella met to discuss the future of the Brotherhood” and to devise a plan to support and collect money for Hamas, a designated terrorist group, according to federal court documents. Ahmad was joined at the secret meeting by current CAIR executive director Nihad Awad.

CAIR has also been implicated in a separate terrorism case in Virginia, “US v. Sabri Benkahla,” in which the government concluded that the group was founded by the Muslim Brotherhood.

“From its founding by Muslim Brotherhood leaders,” wrote Assistant U.S. Attorney Gordon D. Kromberg in the 2007 terrorism case involving CAIR, “CAIR conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists.”

Washington-based CAIR is lobbying hard against the proposed Brotherhood ban because it could spell its own doom, along with other Brotherhood front groups.

Still, HuffPo insists Cruz in his bill erroneously “named CAIR and two other groups — ISNA and the North American Islamic Trust — as ‘affiliates’ of the Muslim Brotherhood.”

The article goes on to claim “there’s ‘no evidence’ that American Muslim groups are fronts for the Brotherhood.”

In fact, the evidence is overwhelming, if only the HuffPo’s reporter bothered to look.

For example, “The following are individuals/entities who are and/or were members of the US Muslim Brotherhood: Islamic Society of North America, aka ISNA, [and] North American Islamic Trust, aka NAIT,” according to the Justice Department’s unindicted co-conspirators list.

An internal Brotherhood document, titled “Preliminary vision for preparing future leadership” and entered into evidence as Government Exhibit 3-64, further ties ISNA to the Muslim Brotherhood by listing it as an “apparatus” of the Brotherhood.

“The evidence introduced at trial established that ISNA and NAIT were among those organizations created by the US-Muslim Brotherhood,” argued former US Attorney James T. Jacks in a 2008 court filing. The lead prosecutor in the Holy Land Foundation, Jacks was awarded a special commendation by Attorney General Eric Holder.

As U.S. District Court Judge Jorge Solis ruled in 2009, the “government has produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR, ISNA and NAIT with Hamas” and the Muslim Brotherhood. Specifically, Solis cited the “Explanatory Memo” and other documents federal agents recovered from a sub-basement in Brotherhood leader Ismail Elbarasse’s home just outside Washington DC.

The judge added that the government proved “by a preponderance of evidence that a conspiracy existed” between these American Muslim organizations and the Muslim Brotherhood.

The shocking truth is, the largest and most important Islamic groups in America are part of a Brotherhood conspiracy to support jihad and subvert the American system of government, asserts former Pentagon official and retired Army Major Stephen Coughlin, author of “Catastrophic Failure: Blindfolding America in the Face of Jihad.”

“The Brotherhood’s goal in the United States is jihad,” he said — or more specifically, a “civilization jihad” achieved “through a process of infiltration and subversion” with the ultimate goal of replacing the US Constitution with Shariah law.

The government agrees.

“The Muslim Brotherhood, also known as the Ikhwan Al Muslimin, was founded in Egypt. Its ultimate goal is the creation of a global Islamic State governed by Sharia law,” former prosecutor Jacks asserted in a 2008 court filing.

“Muslim Brotherhood members first migrated to the United States in the 1960s, where they began their grassroots work on campuses through an organization called the Muslim Students Association,” he added, before spinning off ISNA and NAIT. “By the mid-1980s, the US-Muslim Brotherhood had grown exponentially, established numerous front organizations, developed a solid hierarchical structure, and received direction from the International Muslim Brotherhood’s General Guide.”

“Hamas was established in 1987 as an outgrowth of the Muslim Brotherhood,” Jacks continued, further outlining the conspiracy. “In the late 1980s and early 1990s, the US-Muslim Brotherhood was controlled by Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood members,” including CAIR’s founders.

Most law enforcement officials, as well as even some Middle Eastern governments, do not view the Brotherhood as the benign or moderate organization portrayed in the American media.

Over the past few years, a handful of Arab nations have officially designated the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization. Since 9/11, several known US-Muslim Brotherhood leaders — including Sami al-Arian and Abdurahman Alamoudi — have been convicted of terrorist activities.

The Inside Story of How John Kerry Secretly Lobbied to Get CAIR Removed From UAE’s Terrorist Organization List

cairhamas2by Steven Emerson
IPT News
January 19, 2017

On Nov. 16, 2014, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) took the unusual step of designating the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), and the Muslim American Society (MAS) – as terrorist organizations.

They were among 83 groups named for their connections to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood.

This outraged CAIR officials, who immediately began efforts to get their organization removed from the list. They found a powerful ally in Secretary of State John Kerry, who authorized State Department officials to meet regularly with UAE officials to lobbying on behalf of CAIR and MAS .

CAIR already had a sympathetic ear in the Obama administration, including the State Department, that had openly embraced and legitimized the entire spectrum of radical Islamist groups falsely posing as religious or civil rights groups, which both CAIR and MAS had done.

At a daily State Department press briefing two days after UAE released its list, a spokesman said that State does not “consider CAIR or MAS to be terrorist groups” but that it was seeking more information from UAE about their decision. He added that “as part of our routine engagement with a broad spectrum of faith based organizations, a range of U.S. government officials have met with officials of CAIR and MAS. We at the State Department regularly meet with a wide range of faith based groups to hear their views even if some of their views expressed at times are controversial.”

In making that admission, the State Department official had effectively affirmed the Obama Administration policy of embracing radical Islamist group under the euphemism of calling them “faith based groups.”

The UAE had good reason to designate CAIR, as records obtained by the FBI indicate it was created as front group for a Hamas support network. While CAIR bills itself as “the nation’s largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization,” the reality is quite different.

Before helping launch CAIR, Executive Director Nihad Awad worked as public relations director for the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), a Hamas propaganda arm in the United States. A 2001 Immigration and Naturalization Service memo documented IAP’s support for Hamas and found that the “facts strongly suggest” that IAP was “part of Hamas’ propaganda apparatus.”

IAP was part of the “Palestine Committee,” created by the Muslim Brotherhood to support Hamas politically and financially. CAIR was added to the Palestine Committee’s roster just after its 1994 creation.

In 2008, the FBI cut off official contact with CAIR, citing evidence from the Holy Land Foundation terror funding trial which documented the connections between CAIR and its founders to Hamas.

In a letter to U.S. Sen. Jon Kyl, the FBI explained, “until we [the FBI] can resolve whether there continues to be a connection between CAIR or its executives and HAMAS, the FBI does not view CAIR as an appropriate liaison partner.”

During a 2003 Senate hearing, U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer, D-NY, said that CAIR is known “to have ties to terrorism.” In 2009 correspondence with the FBI, he wrote that cutting off contact with the Islamist group “should be government-wide policy.”

CAIR and its representatives, meanwhile, often espouse radical ideology and propagate the jihadist narrative that the United States is waging a “war on Islam.” Awad repeated that message as recently as September when he denounced legislation allowing the families of 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia.

CAIR officials often side with Hamas and other Palestinian terrorists.

Read more

Because Nothing Says ‘I CAIR’ Like a Pardon

cair-pleaNational Review, by Andrew C. McCarthy, January 18, 2017:

Thinking about what else could happen in the next 48 hours?

The Investigative Project on Terrorism reports that CAIR (the Council on America-Islamic Relations) is leading a furious lobbying campaign by Islamists in the U.S. to persuade President Obama to free the five Hamas operatives convicted in the Holy Land Foundation case.

Isn’t that rich?

The HLF prosecution is the most significant terrorism financing case the Justice Department has ever done. Hamas, a designated terrorist organization under federal law, is the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. In the HLF case, the government proved not only that leading Islamist organizations in America were helping the Brotherhood transmit millions of dollars overseas to Hamas; prosecutors further demonstrated – using the Brotherhood’s own internal memoranda – that the Brotherhood saw its mission in the United States as “a grand jihad to eliminate and destroy Western civilization from within.”

In this grand jihad, the Brotherhood was in cahoots with these leading Islamist organizations, many of which had roots in the Brotherhood. One of these was … CAIR.

Indeed, Hamas and Brotherhood activists created CAIR in 1993-94 because they realized they needed an organization with legal know-how and media polish to advance the Islamist agenda. Having studied the United States (in a way that we resist studying radical Islam), they also realized that if they labeled their new creation a Muslim “civil rights” organization, the media would play along – CAIR would be lauded as a social justice warrior rather than revealed as a jihadist mouthpiece.

So CAIR was shown to be an unindicted co-conspirator in the HLF case. After the convictions of the five HLF officials in 2008, however, the incoming Obama administration opted against prosecuting CAIR and the other Islamist organizations that had assisted the conspiracy to provide material support to a terrorist organization. In fact, early in his administration, Obama proclaimed his commitment “to working with American Muslims to ensure that they can fulfill zakat.”

As I explained at the time, zakat is often misleadingly translated as “charitable giving” by commentators and government officials. Actually, it is the fortification of the ummah (the notional worldwide Muslim community). Under classic sharia, zakat may only be contributed to Muslims. There are eight categories of permissible zakat recipients; one is Muslims who are fighting in jihad operations. (See the ancient sharia manual Reliance of the Traveller, sec. h8.17: “Zakat: 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[.]”)

I assume the president was simply uninformed about Islamic law – although this is Obama we’re talking about, so maybe it’s that he figures he knows more about how it should be construed than anyone on earth, including those who’ve spent their lives immersed in it. But Islamists would interpret his stated commitment to “ensure that they can fulfill zakat” as ensuring that they could do what the HLF defendants were convicted of doing: providing material support to terrorists. To Islamists, the five HLF convicts have been stuck serving between 15- and 65-year prison sentences for something they believe Obama has said should not be a crime in the first place.

Following the HLF convictions, it was reported that the Obama Justice Department had blocked prosecutions against a top CAIR official and leaders of other Brotherhood-tied organizations.

And now CAIR is pushing for the HLF defendants to be released from their very lengthy sentences. The Islamists’ narrative, as the Investigative Project explains, is that these Hamas operatives are really victims of, yes, “anti-Muslim hysteria.”

It’s a shrewd campaign. The Obama administration has been wholesale onboard the anti-anti-jihad bandwagon since day-one, and it often spouts the anti-Muslim hysteria party line. The administration has championed the Muslim Brotherhood; worked with Islamist governments to restrict American free speech rights (regarding criticism of Islam); armed and trained militias in Libya and Syria that were threaded with jihadists; and colluded with the Islamist government of Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan – a Muslim Brotherhood backer who is among the world’s leading supporters of Hamas. As illustrated by the administration’s shameful orchestration last month of an anti-Israel resolution at the U.N. Security Council, Obama is sympathetic to the hard left’s view that Palestinian terrorists are not really terrorists – they are members of “political organizations” whose regrettable brutality is best understood as “resistance” to “occupation.”

If he were to release the Hamas convicts from the HLF case, Obama would (again) be a hero to both Islamists and leftists. He would simultaneously enrage national-security conservatives in the United States and the Israeli government.

In other words, he’d be doing what he’s done for eight years.

Also see:

A Last, Desperate Plea to Excuse Hamas Support

cair-plea

IPT News
January 12, 2017

As President Obama’s tenure reaches its final days, Islamists in the United States are waging a furious lobbying campaign aimed at securing the freedom of five men convicted of illegally routing millions of dollars to Hamas.

An open campaign urges the president to pardon five former officials from the defunct, Texas-based Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), casting them as victims of “anti-Muslim hysteria” triggered by the 9/11 attacks. In 2008, a jury convicted the five – Shukri Abu Baker, Ghassan Elashi, Mohammed El-Mezain, Abdulrahman Odeh and Mufid Abdulqader – of using a network of Palestinian charities controlled by Hamas to funneling money to the terrorist group.

It is not clear whether the requests to pardon the five, or to commute their sentences and release them from prison, is being considered seriously. Obama’s pardons thus far involved somewhat less serious crimes including fraud, embezzlement and non-violent drug offenses.

But advocates are pushing social media campaigns and online petitions aimed at securing a pardon, or, short of that, a commutation of the five men’s sentences to set them free. The campaign also has enlisted support from at least one member of Congress.

Left unspoken is an undeniable truth behind the pardon/commutation campaign, and behind any ongoing defense of the Holy Land Foundation: Advocates do not believe Hamas support is wrong.

The Muslim Legal Fund of America (MLFA) is leading the charge, supported by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and pro-Palestinian groups.

CAIR’s appeal provided a White House switchboard number for supporters to call and request commutations. Some sites even include contact information for key members of Congress, urging supporters to emphasize the “cruelly disproportionate” length of sentences – from a low of 15 years for El-Mezain, to 65-year terms for Baker and Elashi.

CAIR’s Arizona director Imraan Siddiqui described the prosecution as “a political lynching of charity workers … Its effects still haunt American Muslims.”

After reviewing the entire record in 2011, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals saw it quite differently.

Pleas from the MLFA and Siddiqi ignore the exhibits – many of them internal HLF and related documents – showing the family ties between some defendants and Hamas leaders, a reliance on Hamas officials to speak at HLF fundraisers along with other, consistent pro-Hamas messages.

In addition, records show, HLF (formerly known as the Occupied Land Fund) was part of a network called the “Palestine Committee” in the United States. That committee answered to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood’s mandate that global chapters create “Palestine Committees” in their home countries. Their task was “to support Hamas from abroad,” the Fifth Circuit noted in upholding the convictions and sentences. In the United States, that task fell in part to Hamas political leader Mousa Abu Marzook, who helped create HLF and two other branches – a propaganda wing known as the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP) and a think-tank called the United Association for Studies and Research (UASR).

CAIR was added to the Palestine Committee after its 1994 founding.

“The evidence showed that the long-standing connection between HLF and Hamas began in the late 1980s when HLF arose as a fundraising arm for the Palestine Committee …” the appeals court ruling said. “This fact was notably evident from the … [internal Palestine Committee] documents, which showed that HLF was created along with the IAP.” In addition, Palestine Committee bylaws “specifically recognized HLF as ‘the official organization for fundraising.'”

HLF apologists claim the group was merely interested in helping needy widows and orphans. But, the court pointed out, the orphans included Yehia Ayyash’s children. Ayyash was Hamas’s top bomb maker, nicknamed “The Engineer,” before being killed by Israel.

“An audio tape from 1996 that was seized from HLF’s offices contained songs praising Hamas and discussions of suicide bombers as heroes,” the ruling said.

“We believe that a jury could not help but infer from the above evidence that the defendants had a close association with Hamas and that HLF acted to fund Hamas both before and after Hamas’s designation as a terrorist organization.”

Still, CAIR’s Texas chapter called the five convicted HLF officials “humanitarians,” and described their imprisonment as “an immense wrong.” It cited defense attorney Nancy Hollander’s claim that there was no evidence showing her client, HLF executive director Shukri Abu Baker, breaking the law. “Not a word from his lips that he hated Jews. Not a word from his lips that he supported Hamas. These were fictions,” Hollander said.

That cannot be said for Mufid Abdulqader, who performed and acted in a singing troupe that helped raise money for HLF at IAP events. In this video, admitted into evidence during the 2008 trial, he is shown wearing camouflage and a kaffiyeh as he sings, “I am Hamas, O dear ones … I swear to wipe out the name of the Zionist. And protect my land, Palestine.” Then, he pretends to strangle an actor portraying an Israeli.

Hollander failed to mention that Baker ran HLF and was responsible for who spoke and what was said at its fundraisers. Those events routinely featured Hamas leaders and activists. She also neglected to mention her client’s participation in a secret 1993 Philadelphia gathering of Hamas members and supporters who schemed about how to “derail” the U.S.-brokered Oslo peace accord without coming off looking like terror supporters.

It was Baker who set a key ground rule for the talks, which were secretly recorded and translated by the FBI: No one should mention Hamas by name, he instructed. Instead, call it “Sister Samah,” which is Hamas spelled backward.

The gathering, Baker said, was “a joint workshop between the Holy Land Foundation and the IAP.” Participants should not mention Hamas by name.

Hollander then compared the HLF case – brought against a handful of men with documented and recorded connections to Hamas – to the mass internment of 117,000 Japanese American men, women and children during World War II.

The current campaign would settle for a sentencing commutation, essentially freeing the men on time served. The sentences, from 15 to 65 years in prison, were overly harsh, advocates say.

But the Fifth Circuit had considered this, too, rejecting defense department arguments. Its ruling noted that the probation office’s presentence recommendations included significant terrorism enhancements because HLF gave money to Hamas “in order to rid Palestine of the Jewish people through violent jihad, HAMAS’ mission.”

It added that “the trial was replete with evidence to satisfy application of the terrorism enhancement because of the defendants’ intent to support Hamas. The Hamas charter clearly delineated the goal of meeting the Palestinian/Israeli conflict with violent jihad and the rejection of peace efforts and compromise solutions. The defendants knew that they were supporting Hamas, as there was voluminous evidence showing their close ties to the Hamas movement.”

Those claiming the HLF defendants suffered an injustice, or that they somehow deserve relief, lie about this record or pretend it does not exist. To acknowledge reality is to shatter their own argument, or to come clean about their true feelings about Hamas terrorism. They know that’s a losing hand. It’s something Shukri Abu Baker talked about in that 1993 Philadelphia meeting.

They need to mislead people if they are going to be successful, Baker said.

“War is deception,” he said. “Deceive, camouflage, pretend that you’re leaving while you’re walking that way … Deceive your enemy.”