Islamopower: Meet the new Muslim PAC

Jetpac founder Nadeem Mazen has ties to the Council on American-Islamic Relations. His goal is to get more Muslims elected to city, state and federal offices across the U.S.

WND, by Leo Hohmann April 23, 2017:

A new organization called Jetpac Inc. is mobilizing to get more Muslims elected to public office in U.S. cities and states, but an investigation into the founder’s background reveals ties to the extremist Muslim Brotherhood, which has been hard at work trying to influence American politics since the 1990s.

Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., the first Muslim elected to Congress, was recently promoted to the number-two man at the DNC.

The first Muslim elected to a national office was Rep. Keith Ellison, who was elected in 2006 to represent a heavily Democratic district in Minnesota. He was sworn into office with his hand on the Quran, and that singular act opened a world of possibilities for other politically minded Muslims.

But the victories since then have been few and far between, says Nadeem Mazen, and that’s why he has started Jetpac – or the Justice, Education, and Technology Policy Advocacy Center. Its sole purpose is to organize and train Muslims for elected offices at the local, state and national levels.

Mazen, Jetpac’s founder and president, became Massachusetts’ first Muslim elected to public office when he won a seat on the Boston City Council in 2013.

There have been many breakthroughs since Ellison’s election in 2006, not the least of which was Ellison’s own promotion to the No. 2 officer in charge of the Democratic National Committee behind chairman Tom Perez.

Rep. Andre Carson, D-Ind., was elected to Congress in 2008, the city of Hamtramck in 2016 became the first city to be governed by a Muslim-majority city council, and Minneapolis voters elected Ilhan Omar as the nation’s first female Muslim state legislator in November.

Ilhan Omar has aleady been honored with her own “Hijarbie,” a project by a Nigerian Muslim woman.

Ilhan, 34, came to America as a “refugee” from Somalia and was resettled in the growing enclave of Somalis in the Cedar Riverside area of Minneapolis. Not surprisingly, that Somali enclave has now amassed enough numbers to elect a Somali representative to the State House.

Civilization jihad proceeding according to plan?

This is exactly how the Muslim Brotherhood envisioned the takeover of America, through non-violent civilizational jihad, experts on the shadowy network tell WND.

Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, the current health commissioner for the city of Detroit, announced in February he was running for governor of Michigan as a Democrat.

Dr. Abdul El-Sayed with wife Sarah.

Like Ilhan, Ellison and Carson, Sayed has the full backing of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, a spinoff of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Numerous other major cities such as Minneapolis and Boston have elected Muslims to their city councils, which in turn leads to key appointments of Muslims to the police and fire departments.

But that’s not nearly enough progress, says Mazen, the Jetpac founder.

“Muslims are unbelievably underrepresented in elected office,” Mazen told the Boston Globe. “Having Muslims in elected office, the way I am, can change the narrative from being on the defensive [in the media] … to the work that we actually do around issues such as affordable housing.”

There are about 3.3 million Muslims in America, according to an estimate by Pew Research, which account for about 1.5 percent of the U.S. population. CAIR and others estimate the population could be as high as 5 to 7 million.

But the narrative provided by Mazen is mostly propaganda meant for the untrained non-Muslim ear, dutifully passed on as “news” by politically correct media outlets, says Clare Lopez, vice president of research and analysis for the Center for Security Policy and author of “Star Spangled Shariah: The Rise of America’s First Muslim Brotherhood Party.”

Lopez noted Mazen  was a founding member of the CAIR chapter in Massachusetts after serving as the president of the Muslim Student Association at MIT.

CAIR and the MSA are both off-shoots of the extremist Muslim Brotherhood, which is banned as a terrorist organization in at least half a dozen countries, including Russia, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the UAE.

While most Muslim politicians publicly support social justice, environmental justice, free and easy abortions, same-sex marriage and the full pallet of LGBTQ rights, that is merely a means to an end. The ultimate goal is Shariah law for Americans, Lopez said.

But who could ever get elected in America on a platform of Shariah law?

She says the Brotherhood will back candidates who wrap themselves in the liberal causes of the day and attach themselves to the Democratic Party, knowing that they have a ready-made political machine eager to push their candidates to the forefront of American politics.

“We know that the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood began planning at least a decade ago to seed the U.S. political system with young, up-and-coming, Shariah-adherent, Shariah-promoting stealth jihadist like Ilhan Omar in Minnesota – now it’s happening – they are shrewdly using our own system against us – via Star Spangled Shariah.”

Omar made headlines Thursday when she was one of only two lawmakers to vote against a bill in the Minnesota State House that would allow life insurance companies to deny death benefits to the families of dead terrorists.

Two years ago, on March 12, 2014, the Muslim Brotherhood launched its own political party, the U.S. Council of Muslim Organizations. But that hasn’t changed its longtime modus operandi of working with and through friendly non-Muslim organizations and parties.

With the Democratic Party already in the bag, the Brotherhood scored another hit this past week when the U.S. Green Party instructed its activists to cooperate with and build political networks with CAIR and other Muslim groups at the grassroots level.

Cover page and title of the briefing paper published by the Green Party

The Council of Muslim Organizations is an umbrella organization whose membership reads like a Who’s Who of leaders in Brotherhood front groups – with the goal of getting more Muslim representation in Washington and in state capitols, according to a report by Investor’s Business Daily, IBD.

“We are aiming to bring more participation from the Muslim community, Nihad Awad, executive director of CAIR’s national office, told IBD.

IBD concluded the Council of Muslim Organizations “also aims to elect Islamists in Washington, with the ultimate objective of ‘institutionalizing policies’ favorable to Islamists — that is, Shariah law.”

But the effort precedes 2014 and actually found its genesis in 2010, said Lopez.

“What’s key to understand is how these groups are spinning off of the first generation,” she said.

In January 2010, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gifted the Muslim Brotherhood with a key opportunity when she signed the Exercise of Discretionary Authority under Section 212(d)(3)(B)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, according to a Center for Security Policy report.

That stroke of a pen by Clinton allowed Tariq Ramadan, the grandson of Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al Banna, to enter the United States for the first time since the Department of Homeland Security revoked his visa in July 2004.

Less than four months later, on May 5, 2010, Project Mobilize, which included board members with ties to multiple Muslim Brotherhood front organizations, was founded by M. Yasser Tabara in Summit, Illinois.

At its website, Project Mobilize’s mission included:

  • To Develop the political capital existing within the Muslim American community;
  • To Organize the Muslim American community around issues determined relevant; and
  • To Advocate on behalf of the Muslim American community to elected officials and persons with political clout so that they act upon the concerns and desires of their Muslim American constituents.

The U.S. Holy Land Foundation terror-financing trial in 2008 identified networks of Muslim groups that were moving to elevate the next generations to positions of leadership. They hit pay dirt during the Obama administration, which embedded many of these sleepers into federal agencies, where they remain to this day.

“In other words, the Islamic movement is expanding aggressively in the U.S. even while taking steps to disguise their true affiliation with the jihadist Muslim Brotherhood,” Lopez said.

A trip to Saudi Arabia

Back in 2007, a Muslim prayer leader and professor at Georgetown University, Yahya Hendi, traveled to Saudi Arabia and spoke to fellow Muslim academics. He said Islam was already becoming part of the mainstream of American society in 2007 and predicted that by the end of 2015 approximately 30 cities would have Muslim mayors. He said there would be “three or four” Muslim members of Congress by 2015 (There were two).

The only potential roadblock to continued growth of Islam in America could be the presence of “Christian extremists,” Hendi told the Saudis, as reported by the Washington Times.

Perhaps it is because that prediction has failed to materialize that the Muslim Brotherhood has been doubling down since 2014 on its political organizing.

Ann Corcoran, author of the Refugee Resettlement Watch blog, notes that the key to getting Muslims into office rests with refugee placement into cities, which inevitably leads to enclaves that vote in blocs for Muslim candidates.

“I remember hearing about Hendi’s prediction in 2007 and it struck me as very odd. Imagine the outcry if an American Catholic bishop traveled to the Vatican and said we need to have 30 Catholic mayors in the U.S.?” she said. “Or what if a Jewish rabbi went to Israel and said we envision 30 Jewish mayors by 2025? The media would have a field day with that, calling it bigoted and divisive. But the Muslims say we need more Muslim mayors and the media cheers.

“If your goal is to improve government at the city, state or national level, what should it matter what the politician’s religion is?”

Do Loretta Lynch’s Ties with ‘Muslim Advocates’ Org Explain Her Whitewash of Orlando?

Muslim org influencePJ MEDIA, BY J. CHRISTIAN ADAMS JUNE 22, 2016:

Top Justice Department officials, including Attorney General Loretta Lynch, have worked with an organization dedicated to interfering with law enforcement efforts to monitor activities at the most radical mosques.

Lynch and DOJ Civil Rights Division head Vanita Gupta have appeared at gala events for an organization called Muslim Advocates. The George Soros-funded charity has badgered the New York City Police Department away from monitoring the most radical mosques in the city.

The organization is also responsible for rewriting training materials for federal law enforcement to decouple the role of radical Islam from terrorist acts. An inter-agency working group comprised of multiple federal law enforcement agencies in 2014 adopted this whitewash urged by Muslim Advocates.

The DOJ’s short-lived effort to airbrush Islam out of the 911 tapes from Orlando shows you how far they will go to twist the truth about what is causing these attacks. I appeared on Fox and Friends today to discuss the organization and the latest. (Video here).

Civil Rights Division head Gupta appeared at the sold-out annual gala event for Muslim Advocates in Millbrae, California. Muslim Advocates lobbies the administration heavily to oppose any link between terrorist acts and radical Islam, and opposes monitoring of radical mosques. Gupta told the crowd:

To anyone who feels afraid, targeted, or discriminated against because of which religion you practice or where you worship, I want to say this — we see you. We hear you. And we stand with you. If you ever feel that somehow you don’t belong, or don’t fit in, here in America, let me reassure you  you belong.

Muslim Advocates also conducts recruitment and training for lawyers designed to help FBI terrorist targets and interviewees navigate the interviews. Their annual report states:

Throughout the year we grew our internal volunteer referral list for FBI interviews. Today, the list is over 130 lawyers nationwide who are ready and able to assist community members contacted by the FBI.

The purported non-partisan tax exempt 501(c)(3) charity is conducting a campaign against corporations like Coca-Cola to hector them into not sponsoring the Republican convention in Cleveland.

Muslim Advocates gave Vanita Gupta their Thurgood Marshall Award “for her commitment to criminal justice reform and to holding perpetrators of anti-Muslim hate accountable” at the California gala.

Attorney General Eric Holder also appeared at a Muslim Advocates gala event on December 10, 2010.

(Banner photo from Facebook)

The Patience of the Jihadists

sssAmerican Thinker, by Eileen F. Toplansky, Jan. 26, 2016:

The ongoing interpretations concerning natural-born citizenship may eventually become a moot point.  With the burgeoning immigration of groups of people who have little to no devotion to American ideals but who will have children born on American soil, one can easily envision that, in the not so distant-future, an American-born individual schooled in the hatred of jihad could conceivably occupy the White House.

Already the radical Muslim Brotherhood has “built the framework for a political party in America that seeks to turn Muslims into an Islamist voting bloc.”  The U.S. Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO) aims to elect Islamists in Washington in order to institute sharia law and dismantle the American Constitution.

The Center for Security Policy’s Star Spangled Shariah: The Rise of America’s First Muslim Brotherhood Party is part of its Civilization Jihad Reader Series (Volume 5).  The Center asserts:

[T]he Muslim Brotherhood has been actively infiltrating American government and society since shortly after the Second World War. But March 2014 marked a significant step forward for the Brotherhood in America. Some of its key leadership figures joined together to establish the U.S. Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO), the first political activist group in this country to be openly associated with the jihadist Muslim Brotherhood. Formation of the USCMO was announced  … [in] March 2014, just blocks from the U.S. Capitol Building. At the podium were: Ousama Jammal, Secretary General USCMO and past President of The Mosque Foundation; Naeem Baig, President, Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA); Nihad Awad, National Executive Director, Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR); Mazen Mokhtar, Executive Director, Muslim American Society (MAS); Imam Mahdi Bray, National Director, American Muslim Alliance (AMA)[.] The significance of this move is best understood in the context of what the Muslim Brotherhood itself calls ‘civilizational jihad,’ a term used in its 1991 strategic plan: An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal of the Group in North America. As the Explanatory Memorandum states, the Brotherhood’s mission in America is ‘destroying Western civilization from within,’ preparing the way for its replacement by the rule of Islam’s supremacist code, shariah (Islamic law). Unlike more immediately violent Brotherhood off-shoots – for example, al-Qa’eda, Egyptian Islamic Jihad, the Islamic State or HAMAS, the Brotherhood in the West has generally taken care to operate stealthily, under the radar, even to the point of sometimes denying its very presence in the United States.

And it has been stunningly successful.

Obama continually exhibits a preference for Islam and has, over the period of his two terms, shown a “willingness … to engage in dialogue, outreach, and collaboration with self-identified jihadis.”  In February 2015, at a White House Summit to Counter Violent Extremism, Obama actually said that “the notion that the West was at war with Islam was an ‘ugly lie.'”  Furthermore,  he asserted that “when people feel marginalized, that opens a door for the terrorist ideology.”  He implied that Americans who criticize Islam are guilty of provoking Islamic terrorists.  This, coupled with the disturbing in-depth piece by Soeren Kern entitled “Islam and Islamism in America” for the period January-March 2015 wherein one learns that Representative Andre Carson (D-Indiana), a convert to Islam with extensive ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, was appointed to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence should make one shudder.

Obama’s appeasement toward Iran and his indifference to the jihadist danger in Europe and  America have paved the way to what the jihadists crave – Islamization of America.  Obama is the prelude to this Islamization, since his “fundamentally transforming the United States of America” has helped “advance the Brotherhood’s ‘civilization jihad agenda.'”  For example, Obama stated he was “committed to working with American Muslims to ensure that they could fulfill zakat,” or charitable giving, but conveniently glossed over the fact that this charitable giving requires a fixed percentage to be donated to jihad.

The USCMO is actually the “first religious identity political party” in the history of America.  And while it projects “an image of patriotic transparency,” it is, in fact, “shrouding its actual anti-Constitutional activities and objectives.”  Its members participate in anti-Semitic, pro-Hamas, pro-Muslim Brotherhood demonstrations and raise funds for Islamic Relief USA.  According to Ryan Mauro at the Clarion Project, “IRUSA is the American branch of Islamic Relief Worldwide (IRW), based in the United Kingdom.”  In 2014, the United Arab Emirates banned IRW as a terrorist group.  In fact, under the guise of philanthropy and social welfare, the organization raises funds for Hamas.  Mauro explains that IRUSA “donated to a fundraiser for the Chicago chapter of CAIR in March 2012 and the annual joint MAS-ICNA [Muslim American Society-Islamic Circle of North America] conference in December 2012.”  Yet in 2011, “an anonymous high-ranking Justice Department official was quoted as saying, ‘ten years ago we shut down the Holy Land Foundation. It was the right thing to do. Then the money started going to KindHearts. We shut them down too. Now the money is going through groups like Islamic Relief[.]'”

In 2014, the USCMO joined anti-Israel protesters in downtown Chicago.  This “Stand with Gaza” event marked USCMO’s “first public demonstration in solidarity with Hamas, the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood.  Recall that Hamas’ Covenant commits it to the “destruction of the Jewish State of Israel.”

USCMO financially supports U.S. representatives Keith Ellison and Andre Carson.  Their remarks made at the Muslim Brotherhood political party banquet held in June of 2014 have never been made public.  Both of these elected American politicians are committed to “mobilizing the Muslim political machine in the United States.”  Carson has stated that “America will never tap into educational innovation and ingenuity without looking at the model that we have in our madrassas, in our schools, where innovation is encouraged, where the foundation is the Quran.”  Neither Ellison nor Carson has explained why he was participating at a USCMO event in an official capacity.

Is it a coincidence that USCMO debuted in Illinois politics in 2014, considering Obama’s own roots in the windy city?

As the 2016 presidential election looms, the USCMO is attempting to “fortify Muslim citizenship rights.”  Obama is rushing to bestow citizenship on immigrants in part “by adjusting Justice Department rules so that those who want to help with the citizenship process can get their credentials quicker.”  In addition, there is a “blitz of television promotional spots” aimed at enticing legal permanent residents who have been here for a minimum of three years to take the test.

And while it has been clarified that Pine Bush High School in New York did not compel students to say, “I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under Allah,” this can be taken as yet one more incremental step toward softening American sensibilities – reciting the pledge in any other language still must maintain the truth of the translation, which clearly this did not do.

Daniel Greenfield explains that “[w]hat ISIS accomplishes by brute force, the Muslim Brotherhood does by setting up networks of front groups. Both ISIS and the Brotherhood control large Muslim populations. ISIS conquers populations in failed states. The Muslim Brotherhood however exercises control over populations in the cities of the West. We could bomb Raqqa, but can we bomb Dearborn, Jersey City or Irvine? This is where the Caliphate curve truly reaches its most terrifying potential.”

Moreover, “we are not at war with an organization, but with the idea that Muslims are superior to non-Muslims and are endowed by Allah with the right to rule over them, to rob them, to rape them and enslave them.  ISIS is the most naked expression of this idea.  But it’s an idea that everyone [such as the Muslim Brotherhood and the USCMO] on the Caliphate curve accepts.”

I urge everyone to obtain a copy of Star Spangled Shariah in order to comprehend the depth and breadth of the Muslim Brotherhood’s desire to install sharia law into America.  It is very evident that “the United States of America faces a clear and present danger from the Muslim Brotherhood through the United States Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO) members because of their shariah compliant agenda that supports and advocates jihad.”

Sharia is a supremacist and totalitarian law that is totally and absolutely incompatible with the Constitution.  It is imperative that Americans understand this difference and demand the passage of American laws for American citizens.  Furthermore, Americans must publicly object to the conversion of churches into mosques.

Ultimately, Americans need to question candidates about their views on Islam and sharia.  The duplicity of the Muslim Brotherhood and the USCMO have to be continually exposed if the Republic is to survive.  This is, indeed, a civilizational conflict between freedom and slavery.

Eileen can be reached at middlemarch18@gmail.com.

Why ‘Draw Mohammed’? The Artist Explains

Fawstin2National Review, by Andrew C. McCarthy, January 2, 2016:

Mohammed cartoons don’t inspire Islamic violence. Islamic violence inspires Mohammed cartoons.” That is what Bosch Fawstin tells me. And he knows whereof he speaks.

Fawstin is the award-winning cartoonist thrust into international notoriety in May when he won a “Draw Muhammad” contest in Garland, Texas — a contest that became the first terrorist target of the Islamic State on American soil.

The event was intended to be less a competition than a celebration of free-expression principles. Because those principles undergird Western civilization, they have become the prime target of Islamic supremacists. And when we talk about Islamic supremacists, we are not talking only about violent jihadists, such as the two ISIS-inspired terrorists who were killed in a firefight with police while attempting a mass murder of Fawstin and his fellow contestants.

There are also the “moderates” who specialize in exploiting the atmosphere of intimidation created by jihadist organizations: the Muslim Brotherhood’s international web of Islamic activist groups and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), the 57-government bloc that claims to represent Muslim interests globally.

The methods of the “moderates” might differ from those of ISIS and al-Qaeda — and given the extensive promotion of jihadist violence by the Brotherhood and several OIC member states, we say “might” with tongue firmly in cheek. The “moderate” goal, however, is the same: the imposition of sharia, which is Islam’s societal framework and legal code. As Fawstin explains it: “Devout Muslims want their laws to be our laws. In essence, they want us to be de facto Muslims.”

RELATED: Just Asking about Islam and Terrorism

In that vein, priority No. 1 has been pressuring the United States and its Western allies to stifle free expression, to supplant our free marketplace of ideas with Islam’s repressive blasphemy standards. This imperative has received a major boost from the Obama administration: from the president, who is sworn to preserve, protect, and defend the First Amendment, and also from his former secretary of state Hillary Clinton, who would like to be the next to make a mockery of that solemn oath. Colluding with the Brotherhood and the OIC, Obama and Clinton sponsored United Nations Human Rights Resolution 16-18: a blatantly unconstitutional provision that calls on all member states to ban speech that could “incite” not just violence but “hostility” to Islam.

This goes to the heart of why the Garland event has been widely misunderstood. With Obama and Clinton working with anti-American Islamists to attack free speech, it is no surprise that the administration’s slavish media are portraying Islam’s critics as wild-eyed bigots, and their “Draw Muhammad” contest as an exercise in gratuitous insult — the kind of expression that even free-speech advocates often shy from defending.

RELATED: Dispelling the ‘Few Extremists’ Myth: The Muslim World Is Overcome with Hate

The narrative betrays ignorance of Islam’s blasphemy proscriptions. Insulting speech barely scratches the surface of all that is forbidden. Classical sharia prohibits all artistic expression that depicts animate life — deeming it an offensive imitation of Allah’s creative act. Far beyond insult, moreover, sharia forbids speech that subjects Islam to any objective examination that could result in negative criticism. Also forbidden are words that imply unbelief; that could be taken to rebuke Allah or Mohammed (even if gently or in jest); or that appear to deny a principle established by authoritative sharia scholarship. Islamic supremacists would apply prohibitions to non-Muslims as well as Muslims, because they believe that Allah has commanded them to impose sharia on the unwilling. And as for Muslims, speech that announces or implies apostasy is punishable by death.

This is what drives Fawstin’s work. “I draw Mohammed,” he says, “because the enemy tells me I can’t.” In Garland, that meant not just a rendering, but a rendering of the act of rendering. Describing his winning cartoon, he explains: “I draw myself drawing Mohammed, and Mohammed with his sword in hand, yells at me, ‘You Can’t Draw Me!’ to which I reply (in a word balloon), ‘That’s why I draw you.’”

The idea was to underscore the free-speech purpose of the contest. The imposition of Islamic law “includes banning much of our music, art, and literature,” Fawstin observes. “Look at how ISIS has been destroying antiquities, for example.” The way to fight back, he believes, is with open and unwavering dedication to free expression:

The way I see it, if drawing Mohammad can get you killed, then he should be drawn again and again and again and again, until drawing him loses all power. And, within reason, doing something that an enemy doesn’t want you to do is reason enough to do it, on sheer principle.

Unlike many Americans, particularly in Washington, who believe in fighting fire with accommodation, Fawstin grasps that steely resolve is the only way to face down this enemy. Perhaps it has something to do with being raised in the Bronx — as a Muslim. His Albanian family was what would today be called “moderate Muslims,” although they identified themselves simply as Muslims, Fawstin recounts. Interestingly, this echoes Turkey’s Islamist president Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who rejects the notion of “moderate Muslims” —  he maintains that “Islam is Islam, and that’s it.”

Growing up, Fawstin increasingly sensed incongruity: His family was “moderate” in their adherence to Islam, rarely going to mosque and selectively following sharia strictures; yet the Jew-hatred and misogyny that are hallmarks of Islamic supremacism ran rampant among his “moderate” relatives. As he recalls:

I phased out of Islam in my mid teens when I began to think about morality in a serious way, when I saw the contrast between Islamic values and American values, and when I was beginning to really recognize what was good and true in the world.

For Fawstin, the 9/11 attacks were a call to arms — in the “pen is mightier than the sword” sense. He had “fallen in love with superhero comic books” during childhood and was already embarked on a career as a cartoonist. His rage over the atrocity merged with his professional passion to forge a determination to respond in a comic-book and graphic-novel form.

The semi-biographical result is The Infidel, Featuring Pigman, a comic book that is part of a graphic novel. The plot revolves around twin brothers who react to 9/11 in opposite ways: One dives deeper into his Islamic roots; the other, a Muslim apostate, creates “an ex-Muslim counter-jihad superhero comic book.” It is a story within a story: As the superhero, Pigman, battles his jihadist nemesis, the conflict between the twins escalates.

RELATED: Yes, Islamic Extremism Is Islamic, But That’s Just the Beginning of the Debate

Naturally, I ask Fawstin, “Why Pigman?” The idea, he quips, is to exploit the enemy’s “pigotry.” It is a concept quite at odds with Western governments’ “outreach” style of counterterrorism. Rather than attempting to placate jihadists, Fawstin prefers to study their ideology, find out what they fear and loathe, and use it against them. He recalled from his Muslim childhood the strictures against eating pork or “coming into contact with pig, in any way,” along with the fact that being called a “pig” was considered the worse of insults. Thus he decided that pigskin leather was the perfect costume for his protagonist, who is moved to combat after witnessing the 9/11 attacks from New York’s Ground Zero.

Fawstin would not have created the cartoon series or drawn Mohammed at Garland had it not been for 9/11. Contrary to the blame-America-first storyline, it was the jihad that provoked his determined response, not the other way around. And it is the threats he’s received because of his work that inspire him to persevere.

The enemy is no match for America on the military battlefield. Nor can they compete in the battle of ideas, where their tactic is suppression precisely because their repugnant ideas cannot bear examination. As terrorists, their only power lies in paralyzing us, instilling in us a fear to defend our principles, like free speech. Obama and Clinton loudly signal a readiness to surrender those principles, theorizing that the enemy will be appeased. Bosch Fawstin defiantly lives those principles, reckoning that if we all did, the enemy would not stand a chance.

I like his plan better.

— Andrew C. McCarthy is a policy fellow at the National Review Institute. His latest book is Faithless Execution: Building the Political Case for Obama’s Impeachment.

SHARIA LAW – BRITAIN’S BLIND SPOT

sw-eye-bannerSharia Watch, Dec. 31, 2015:

Contents

  1. Muslim Council of Britain
  2. Islamic Sharia Council
  3. Muslim Association of Britain
  4. Federation of Student Islamic Societies
  5. The Cordoba Foundation
  6. British Muslim Initiative
  7. Green Lane Mosque
  8. East London Mosque/London Muslim Centre
  9. Islamic Forum of Europe
  10. iEngage
  11. Islam Channel
  12. Islamic Human Rights Commission
  13. London Central Mosque (Regent’s Park Mosque)
  14. Mosques engaged in underage marriage
  15. Approach of the legal profession

Introduction

Sharia Watch UK seeks to highlight and expose those movements in Britain which advocate and support the advancement of sharia law in British society. We seek to explain and describe sharia law in relation to specific issues – primarily the treatment of women, freedom of speech, finance, and the marketplace.

Sharia Watch UK believes in freedom of religion, but we say that its practice must remain within the laws that have been set down by Parliament. To this end, we aim to expose the ways in which sharia law operates in Britain in contravention of the law. We will also highlight the areas in which sharia  advances within the parameters of the law.

We call on the UK government to recognise that the establishment of a sharia state, or campaigning for such, is itself an extremist position. We base this on the fact that a sharia state would involveprofound mistreatment of women and girls (including forced marriage and unequal legal status), theimplementation of barbaric punishments (including stonings and amputations) and the complete destruction of freedom of speech and democracy.

We urge the UK government to immediately cease all funding of groups with such extremist political views, to arrest and charge people where there is evidence of any breach of laws, for example incitement to violence against women or Jews, and to ensure that laws on public order and discrimination are upheld equally across all communities irrespective of religion, cultural beliefs or background.

We urge the UK government to make a clear, unequivocal and public denouncement of sharia law and Islamist ideology, and to ensure all laws which prevent extremism are applied to the groups named in this report.

Sharia Watch UK makes a clear distinction between Muslims as human beings, and Islam as a system of belief. We believe strongly that all Muslims should be afforded equal human and civil rights alongside all other citizens. We believe equally strongly that Muslims must also be burdened with the same responsibilities as all other citizens. However, we assert that Islam is a belief system like any other and as such is liable to scrutiny, criticism, and ridicule and that it is the democratic right of all British citizens to be free to discuss any belief system, and to hold any opinions on that belief system, as they see fit.

We wish to make it clear that the information contained in this report is intended to inform both the British public and our elected representatives of the true beliefs and political philosophy of various “mainstream” Islamic organisations in the UK. We ask that the government recognises the extreme nature of such beliefs and condemns these accordingly.

We would like to stress that all of the information contained in this report can already be found in the public domain.

Muslim Council of Britain

The Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) is perhaps the most prominent of Britain’s “mainstream” Islamic organisations. Founded in London in 1997, the organisation describes itself as “a national representative Muslim umbrella body with over 500 affiliated national, regional and local organisations, mosques, charities and schools.” The Muslim Council of Britain has received several hundred thousand pounds of taxpayers’ money, despite evidence of its links with extremists and its own extremist beliefs. Cabinet ministers have condemned the MCB for its boycott of Holocaust Memorial Day. In 2009 the British Government cut ties with the Muslim Council of Britain after Daud Abdullah, the Deputy Secretary General, became a signatory to the Istanbul Declaration, which calls for attacks on British troops and Jewish communities.

Representatives of the Muslim Council of Britain feature regularly in the media, particularly at moments of significance involving Islam. For example, following the murder of Drummer Lee Rigby in Woolwich, London, senior MCB representative Ibrahim Mogra appeared alongside the Archbishop of Canterbury in a joint message of condemnation and reconciliation. Similarly, Mogra acted as MCB spokesman on the issue of child sex grooming in cities around England. The MCB worked with the police, the NSPCC and other Muslim groups to raise awareness of this problem.

Following the exposure of a number of mosques across Britain which had agreed to marry underage girls, Mogra was again interviewed by numerous media bodies, as representative of the MCB. He told the Daily Mail: “UK law does not allow the marriage of underage girls and that’s all that matters to us here. In this country, it is illegal, it is forbidden and no imam should be allowed to conduct the marriage of an underage child. It should be noted that Mr Mogra’s opposition to child marriage was not based on any moral concern for the child or indeed for women’s rights generally.

Following the London underground terrorist bombings in 2005, a number of Muslim organisations came together to form the Mosques and Imams National Advisory Board (NIMAB), the aim of which was, according to the new group, to regulate mosques and to ensure that extremism was not being preached. This initiative was reported by the BBC in a highly positive light. The report stated that four of the largest Muslim organisations in Britain, namely the MCB, the Muslim Association of Britain, the British Muslim Forum, and the Al‐Khoei Foundation, shared the government’s concern about radicalisation in mosques.

Furthermore, the MCB was described by Baroness Shirley Williams as “a sensible organisation” on BBC’s Question Time, and representatives of the organisation regularly appear as guests on the BBC, including its Sunday morning discussion programme The Big Questions.

Sharia Watch UK believes that the MCB is itself an extremist organisation. We further believe that the portrayal of this group by the mainstream media as the moderate face of Islam facilitates the cover‐up of this fact and hides from the public mind the true nature of the organisation and the beliefs and motives of its senior representatives. This report aims to provide a more factual analysis of the MCB and its representatives so that the public can have a clearer picture of Islamic extremism in Britain.

Read more

FBI Suspends Counterterror Program After Pressure from Fringe Islamic Groups

GettyImages-73534290-FBI-seal-640x480Breitbart, by Jordan Schachtel, Nov. 2, 2015:

The Federal Bureau Of Investigation has suspended the unveiling of a new counter-radicalization website designed for kids after fringe Islamic advocacy organizations said the anti-terror programming discriminates against Muslims.

The FBI website titled, “Don’t Be A Puppet,” was scheduled to go live Monday morning but has been suspended indefinitely after fierce opposition by Islamic groups, the Washington Post reports.

According to reports, the program was designed to lead children and teens through games that were designed to help them identify potential extremists. The FBI initiative also sought to help young men and women steer clear from the radical ideologies that lead people to join Islamic extremist groups.

A spokesman with the FBI told the New York Times late Sunday, prior to the program’s scheduled release: “The F.B.I. is developing a website designed to provide awareness about the dangers of violent extremist predators on the Internet, with input from students, educators and community leaders.”

Some Muslim leaders who were invited to beta-test the program were outraged that the FBI would take the time to develop counterterror initiatives.

“The greatest threat facing American schoolchildren today is gun violence,” Arjun Sethi, a Georgetown Law professor who was invited to screen the program over the summer, told the New York Times. “It’s not Muslim extremism.”

Members from the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), a hard-line anti-Israel organization, were also invited to test the FBI program before it was rolled out.

Abed Ayoub, the ADC’s policy director, said his meetings with the FBI over the program were “very tense.” “If this is shown to middle and high-school students, it’s going to result in bullying of these children,” Ayoub said.

The Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), a Muslim advocacy organization that wasfounded by members of the Muslim Brotherhood, applauded the FBI’s decision to suspend the program..

MPAC Policy Director Hoda Hawa said in a press release:

While we welcome efforts to promote the safety and security of our nation, tools like this that improperly characterize American Muslims as a suspect community with its targeted focus and stereotypical depictions stigmatize Muslim students (or those perceived as such) and can actually exasperate the problem by leading to bullying, bias, and religious profiling of students.

MPAC wrote a follow-up letter to the FBI, declaring that the bureau has no business “educating our youth on countering violent extremism.” Creating programs that attempt to counter Islamic radicalism “can lead to bullying, bias, misperception, as well as racial and religious profiling of students,” the letter added.

Also see:

Jim Harbaugh: ‘Michigan Football Will Watch American Sniper!’

harbaughTruth Revolt, by Bradford Thomas, April 9, 2015:

Newly-hired Michigan head football coach Jim Harbaugh reacted to the controversy over a (temporally) canceled campus screening of American Sniper Wednesday by announcing that the football team would be watching the film regardless of what the university decided:

coach tweet

As TruthRevolt reported Wednesday, a group of about 300 Middle Eastern and North African (MENA) and Muslim students issued a collective letter earlier this week accusing the university of creating an “unsafe space” for students and “tolerating dangerous anti-Muslim and anti-MENA propaganda” by showing a film that contributes to “a culture of Islamophobia in America.” In response, Michigan’s Center for Campus Involvement canceled the screening and apologized for “causing harm” to students.

After getting hammered in the press for caving to a protest, Michigan reversed its decision. Late Wednesday, Michigan’s vice president of student life E. Royster Harper issued a statement calling the temporary cancelation “not consistent” with the university’s “high value” on the freedom of expression and announcing that the screening of Chris Kyle film was back on:

It was a mistake to cancel the showing of the movie ‘American Sniper’ on campus as part of a social event for students.

The initial decision to cancel the movie was not consistent with the high value the University of Michigan places on freedom of expression and our respect for the right of students to make their own choices in such matters.

The movie will be shown at the originally scheduled time and location. We recognize, however, that some students are uncomfortable with the content of the movie, and appreciate that concern.

Therefore, the university also will show an alternative movie, “Paddington,” in another location on campus at that same time and date to provide our students with additional options that evening.