UTT Throwback Thursday: Leaders Unable to Tell Friend from Foe

Understanding the Threat, by John Guandolo, April 27, 2017:

One lesson the recent debacle in Sioux Falls brought to center stage is that many leaders cannot discern friend from foe in the war against the Islamic Movement.  This exposes Americans to greater danger each day.

Here are a few examples:

Abdurabman Alamoudi was the most prominent Islamic leader in the United States in the 1990’s, and founded or led major Islamic organizations, including the Muslim Students Association.  He created the Muslim Chaplain program for the Department of Defense, was a “Goodwill Ambassador” for the State Department, and was the Islamic Advisor to President Clinton.  The Washington Post called him the “pillar” of the Islamic community in Washington, D.C.

In 2003, Alamoudi was arrested at Heathrow Airport in London, England with $340,000 cash he received from the Libyan government for the global jihad.  As the US government publicly stated, Alamoudi was a financier for Al Qaeda.  He was sentenced to 23 years in prison – the sentence was reduced under President Obama’s administration by 6 years.  He will be released in 3 years.

None of the men or women working directly with Alamoudi have been prosecuted.

Mohamed Magid holds a secret clearance and, until recently sat on the Homeland Security Advisory Committee. He worked directly with the last several Secretaries of State, receives awards from the FBI, lectures at CIA headquarters, worked with the Obama administration, and was publicly lauded by the President’s Deputy National Security Advisor – Denis McDonough.  Until 2014, Magid was the President of the largest Islamic organization in North America, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) – which also happens to be, according to the Department of Justice, a Muslim Brotherhood organization which directly funds the terrorist group Hamas.

Magid was recently given another award by FBI Director James Comey.

Anwar al Awlaki was called the “new face of moderate Islam” by some in the media, like NPR and PBS.  He gave lectures inside the US Capitol about Islam’s prophet Mohammad and spoke at the Pentagon while he was the Imam of a Hamas mosque in Virginia – the Dar al Hijra Islamic Center.  This “moderate” muslim was killed in September 2011 by a US drone strike because he was the leader of Al Qaeda in Yemen.

Suhail Khan currently works for Microsoft, and has been given access into inner circles inside the Republican party.  On 9/11/2001 he was working at the White House.  His lead advocate is Republican strategist Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform.  A number of Republicans have stepped up to defend Khan including leaders of the American Conservative Union.  Khan served for two successive Secretaries of Transportation under the Bush administration and held a secret clearance

Suhail Khan is the son of one of the most influential Muslim Brotherhood leaders in the United States.  ISNA has an annual award named after his father.  Khan himself publicly lauds his deceased father and proudly proclaims the jihadi mantra that muslims love death more than the unbelievers love life.

Siraj Wahhaj was the first Muslim Imam to offer prayers inside the US House of Representatives.  Wahhaj is an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and was a character witness for the Blind Sheikh, convicted for his part in a number of terrorist plots in the US.

On any given day, Nihad Awad can be found walking the halls of Congress, on CNN or Fox News programs (like the O’Reilly Factor when it was on the air) or meeting with Christian or Jewish leaders around the nation as a part of “outreach.”  Local and and national media fall over themselves to promote Awad’s organization, the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), as a “civil rights organization” and they go to great lengths to defend them.

The US Department of Justice identifies CAIR as a member of the US Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee, which is Hamas.  CAIR is Hamas.  Nihad Awad is the leader Hamas in the United States and – in UTT’s professional opinion – is also the General Masul (Guide/Leader) of the US Muslim Brotherhood.

American citizens, your leaders across the board – of both political parties – have proven they are incapable of discerning friend from foe.

As UTT continues to restate:  this war will be won at the local level or it will be lost.  Local Sheriffs and pastors are the key.  Get to work educating them.  UTT stands ready to help.

***

Dr. Sebastian Gorka to Astroturf Protesters: You Are ‘Victims of Fake News’

Alex Wong/Getty Images

Breitbart, by Adelle Nazarian and Edwin Mora, april 25, 2017:

GEORGETOWN, DC – An astroturf protest campaign targeted Donald Trump’s national security adviser Dr. Sebastian Gorka Monday, who appeared on a panel on cyber security at Georgetown University. Gorka branded the protesters “victims of fake news.”

Approximately 20 protesters gathered inside the hall where the event was held with signs falsely accusing Gorka of being a Nazi, a war criminal, and a fascist.

At the prestigious foreign policy event, Gorka discussed a variety of topics relevant to foreign policy and national security scholars. His remarks focused primarily on personal experiences in dealing with fake news and the manipulation of facts by the mainstream media:

“Eight out of ten times, I can read something written in the daily paper about an event that occurred the night before, and it is literally 180 degrees incorrect,” said Gorka in his remarks to the crowded room. “It is totally contrary to what happened inside the building 80 percent of the time. That’s something that has opened my eyes to the lack of true investigative journalism.”

He labeled “the idea that a 22-year-old with access to Google is a journalist” as “problematic” and noted his view that the days of classic investigative journalism, which required in-depth research, “are behind us.”

Gorka discussed his parents’ experiences fleeing both Nazis and Communists in his native Hungary and how biased journalists have manipulated the facts of his early life to create the impression that Gorka himself is a member of the Nazi and Communist organizations he fled.

Gorka is not a member of a Nazi organization and has never pledged loyalty to any such organization.

The media accusations claim a pin Gorka wears to remind him of his parents’ struggle against communists and fascists ties him to these illicit groups. When he was eight years old, Gorka’s father was awarded a medal that is associated with a military order, the ‘Hungarian Order of Heroes, Vitezi Rend,’ created after the First World War. An anti-Communist organization gave it to him, recognizing him for his resistance to fascists and Communist dictatorship.

On Monday, he explained once again the story behind the pin he wears:

My parents died 14 years ago, and in their memory, for what they suffered under the Nazis and the Communists — my father tortured in the basement of Andrássy út 60 (the secret police headquarters of the fascists first and then the Communists)–I wear that medal to remember their suffering and their resistance. And today, because I work for somebody named Donald J. Trump, that fact is used as part of a fake news propaganda campaign that brought those people in the back of the room, sadly, to a point where they are the victims of fake news.

Gorka also confronted the leftist protesters about their signs calling him an antisemite and fascist. Two of the female students wore hijabs, and one man wore garments traditionally worn by observant Jews. He tied the Jewish prayer shawl (known as Talis) over his shoulders like it was a fashionable scarf:

Every single person holding a placard to protest my parents and myself, I challenge you now: Go away and look at everything I have said an written the last 46 years of my life and find one sentence that is antisemitic or that is anti-Israeli. Because you won’t find it. You’ll find the opposite. My book Defeating Jihad, everything I’ve said on the conference circuit–in Tel Aviv, in Jerusalem–tells you why I’m in this administration. Because this is one of the most pro-Israeli administrations in U.S. history. I’m sorry for you. You are the victims of fake news. But I’ll leave with this: I do what I do because I’ve learned that there is a connective tissue between Nazis, Communists, and Jihadists; they are all the same because they are all totalitarians. And if you perpetuate fake news, you are helping the bad guys.

Gorka cited a case study from the end of the Cold War by National Defense University’s Active Members Working Group as a model on how to identify and combat fake news during the Soviet era:

He explained how this group had “as its mandate, from the highest levels in the Reagan administration, the mission to identify Soviet propaganda, illuminate its sources, and destroy it from the inside to show just how much the message was a lie.” He suggested this group’s case study could be used to similarly combat fake news propagated over social media through mediums like Telegram and Twitter.

In conclusion, Gorka said:

What we are witnessing today–whether it’s RT, whether its ISIS tweets, Telegram–none of it is new. The platforms may be new, but the concepts of propaganda, dezinformatsiyaMaskirovka, none of these are true. They are just being packaged in new and far more effective ways. And this administration, with our allies and partners, including Israel, intends to take it very, very seriously. Thank you.

None of the few demonstrators congregated would talk to Breitbart News when Edwin Mora asked them to share their position on camera. Mora worked with Gorka during the latter’s tenure as Breitbart News’s National Security editor. Instead, the protesters shared a document accusing Breitbart News of perpetrating fake news.

No protesters responded to Gorka’s request to verbally defend their protest before the panel.

Follow Adelle and Edwin on Twitter @AdelleNaz and @EdwinMora83

Also see:

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?”

Europe’s Rising Islam-Based Political Parties

by Abigail R. Esman
Special to IPT News
April 21, 2017

These past several months, eyes across the world have been trained on a growing far-right movementsweeping Europe and America – from the neo-Nazi groups in Germany and the United States to the increasing popularity of France’s National Front. But another, far less noticed but sometimes equally-radical movement is also emerging across Europe: the rise of pro-Islam political parties, some with foreign support from the Muslim world. And the trend shows no sign of stopping.

Holland’s Denk (“Think”) party, established and led by two Turkish immigrants, is among the most significant. Denk won three seats in the Dutch parliament last month, becoming the country’s “fastest-growing” new party, according to Dutch daily NRC Handelsblad. Its platform: replace ideas of integration with “mutual acceptance” – a charming but antiquated idea in a culture where one group accepts gay marriage and the other is taught that homosexuals should be shoved off of tall buildings; an “acceptance monitor” to measure the extent to which such “mutual acceptance” has succeeded; and the establishment of a dedicated “anti-racism” police force.

While not the first of such Islamic parties in European politics, Denk’s March 15 win makes it an inspiration to others. Existing parties now see a new chance for success, while political aspirants across Europe are making plans to start similar parties of their own.

Hence, while the focus in next week’s French elections will be on Marine le Pen’s National Front, many European Muslims will also be watching the Equality and Justice Party (PEJ), led by French-Turk Sacir Çolak. Like Denk, the party claims to be a voice for the downtrodden, aimed at fighting “inequalities and injustices,” according to a report by the Turkish Anadolu news agency. But also like Denk, it has been accused of representing not the political interests of French citizens, but those of Turkey’s president – a man who has spoken out against assimilation and integration and called on European Turks to reject Western values.

The PEJ is not alone in France: The French Union of Muslim Democrats (UDMF), founded in 2012, made headlines when it entered the 2015 electoral race. Its platform seems more moderate than many of its fellow Muslim parties across Europe: founder Nagib Azergui has insisted in interviews that he respects the secular foundation of the French republic, and advocates philosophy and civic education classes that would help mitigate against the recruitment efforts of Muslim extremists.

The party does, however, seek to establish sharia-compliant banks and calls for Turkey to become a member of the European Union. Further, it seeks to re-install the right of Muslim girls to wear headscarves in public schools, a move that could be seen as a gesture towards re-introducing religion into the secular sphere.

Austria, too, has seen a rise in Islamic political parties, such as the New Movement for the Future (NBZ), founded, like Denk and the PEJ, by Turkish immigrants. Unlike the others, however, NBZ has made little effort to hide its loyalty to Turkey. Following the failed 2016 Turkish coup, for instance, its leader, Adnan Dinçer, called on Austria to respect Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s clampdown on the country and the mass arrests that followed. It is worth noting, however, that Austria’s far right has been particularly virulent in its anti-Islam activity, calling for Islam itself to be banned from the country. Such motions inevitably bring forth counter-movements from the targeted groups, and it was, just those actions which mobilized Dinçer to form the NBZ.

But it was Denk’s success, above all, that inspired Lebanese-Belgian activist Dyab Abou Jahjah to establish his newest political effort: a party (to date, unnamed) aimed at “Making Brussels Great Again, a la Bernie Sanders,” according to an interview in Belgian newspaper de Morgen.

This would be a third attempt for Jahjah, who first came into the public eye in 2002 as the founder of the Brussels-based Arab-European League, a pan-European political group that aimed to create what he called a Europe-wide “sharocracy” – a sharia-based democracy. In 2003, the AEL further organized a political party, RESIST, to run in the Brussels elections: it received a mere 10,000 votes. Now, Jahjah, who also runs an activist group called Movement X, hopes to run again in Brussels’ 2018 elections. While his party has yet to declare a platform, his anti-American, anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian and anti-European rants on Facebook and elsewhere give an indication of his plans. So, too, did a recent blog post in which he wrote: “we must defeat the forces of supremacy, the forces of sustained privileges, and the forces of the status-quo. We must defeat them in every possible arena.”

But he, too, is not alone: days after Denk’s win, fellow Belgian Ahmet Koç announced his own initiative, the details of which have also still to be determined. However, some things are easy enough to predict on the basis of his past: the Turkish-Belgian politician was thrown out of Belgium’s socialist party in 2016 for supporting Erdogan’s efforts to censor Europeans who insult him publicly, and calling for Belgian Turks to rise up against the “traitors” of the 2016 coup.

Both Koç and Jahjah will have to reckon with the ISLAM party, which has already established itself in the Brussels area. Founded in 2012, ISLAM – which poses as an acronym for “Integrité, Solidarité, Liberté, Authenticité, Moralité” is unapologetically religious. Leaders pride themselves on following the Quran, not party politics. With divisions already in place in the Brussels districts of Anderlecht, Molenbeek (the center of Belgian radicalism) and Luik, the party now plans to expand throughout the Brussels region.

So far, none of the existing parties has had a great deal of success – and the emerging parties have yet to make their platforms known, let alone acquire active supporters. But as Denk founder Tunahan Kuzu proudly announced after the March elections, a new voice has now gained power in a European government. But what that voice ultimately will be, and the strength of its commitment to secular and democratic values, remains yet to be seen.

Abigail R. Esman, the author, most recently, of Radical State: How Jihad Is Winning Over Democracy in the West (Praeger, 2010), is a freelance writer based in New York and the Netherlands. Follow her at @radicalstates.

Life insurance for terrorists? America’s 1st Somali legislator says ‘yes’

Ilhan Omar, a community organizer and civil rights activist, won a seat in the Minnesota state House district representing Minneapolis, defeating 44-year Democratic incumbent Phyllis Khan in the 2016 primary election and then easily beating the GOP candidate in November.

WND, by Leo Hohmann, April 21, 2017:

She burst on the scene last August when she upset a 44-year incumbent Democrat in the Minnesota state primary elections to become the nation’s first female Muslim state legislator.

Ilhan Omar, the 34-year-old community organizer who came to America as a refugee from Somalia, was touted by Democrats as a model success story.

“From a refugee camp to the State Capitol with intelligence and insight,” beamed former Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak, who endorsed Omar. “This is a wonderful story to tell as Americans, and a great source of pride for the state of Minnesota’s open arms.”

But on Thursday Omar made her mark in another way.

She was one of only two members of the Minnesota State House to vote against a bill that would allow life insurance companies to deny payouts to the beneficiaries of terrorists who die in violent attacks on Americans.

The House voted 127-2 to pass the bill, which now moves on to a vote in the State Senate.

Omar, who represents the heavily immigrant Cedar Riverside area of Minneapolis, was joined by fellow Democratic Rep. John Lesch of St. Paul in voting against the bill.

Omar’s vote sticks out because at least 42 Somali refugees have been confirmed by the FBI to have left the U.S. to join overseas terrorist organizations, including al-Shabab, the al-Qaida affiliate in Somalia, and ISIS in Syria and Iraq.

Dozens of other Somali-Americans have been tried and/or convicted of providing material support to overseas terrorists.

The Minneapolis-St. Paul area is home to the nation’s largest Somali refugee community, with other significant Somali communities in St. Cloud, Willmar, Owatonna, and Austin, Minnesota. Somali refugees are also concentrated in Columbus, Ohio; Seattle; Atlanta; San Diego; Fargo, North Dakota; and in smaller cities across Colorado, Maine, Tennessee, Kentucky, Virginia and Texas.

Omar is a strong supporter of LGBTQ rights, abortion rights and a champion of environmental justice.

Before she was elected she was an activist who often lobbied the Minneapolis City Council on progressive issues.

Since her election as a legislator she:

  • Opposed a bill to limit mass protests designed to disrupt streets, train service and airport access.
  • Has been given her own Muslim Barbie icon, the “Hijarbie.”
  • Visited her native Somalia to push for women’s leadership, raising the question of why Somali “refugees” are still pouring into the U.S. and other Western countries if the country is safe enough for former refugees to return and lobby the government for pet causes.
  • Traveled to Washington, D.C., in December for a reported White House visit when she made a Facebook post complaining about a cab driver who taunted her with “sexist and Islamophobic” comments. She said he threatened to pull off her hijab and called her “ISIS,” yet she never filed a police report.  In response to an inquiry on her Facebook page, Omar said she planned to file a report once she returned to Minneapolis, adding that she did not feel safe enough to say anything at the moment. The reply did not say whether the report would be with police, the cabdriver’s employer or possibly a civil rights organization.

The Minnesota insurance bill was introduced by Rep. Joe Hoppe, R-Chaska, in response to Syed Farook’s jihadist rampage in San Bernardino, California, in December 2015 in which he shot and killed 14 people and injured 22 at an office Christmas party. Farook made sure his life insurance policies worth $275,000 were valid before conducting the deadly shooting with help from his wife, Tashfeen Malik.

After Farook died in a shootout with police, his mother fought to remain the beneficiary of the life insurance policies. The insurance company balked and the case has gone to court.

Democratic Rep. Debra Hilstrom said the goal of the Minnesota bill “is to make certain that folks don’t benefit [from terrorism] and this limits the beneficiary to the premiums that were paid in. It limits the exposure for the insurance company when someone is committing an act of terrorism.”

Debra Anderson, leader of the ACT For America chapter in Minnesota, praised the legislators who voted for the bill Thursday.

“U.S. life insurance policies that pay out to the families of terrorists reminds me of Muslim regions, such as Palestine, that also make ‘life insurance’ payments to the families of jihadists who kill in the name of Allah.”

Anderson said Omar’s vote was reprehensible and shows where her allegiances lie.

“Rep. Ilan Omar’s vote today clearly demonstrated her allegiance to the best interests of the jihadists’ families, like in Palestine, rather than acting on the behalf of the victims of terrorists,” she said. “Disturbing to say the least.”

Anderson said the bill should have been a no-brainer for any freedom-loving American.

“This incident also clearly demonstrated the legitimate concerns of freedom-loving Americans regarding increased political access by Muslims who exhibit an obvious allegiance to Muslims and Shariah law rather than all Americans and the U.S. Constitution.

“I am very grateful for the astute, courageous legislators who are looking out for the best interests of all Minnesotans.”

If passed by the Senate and signed into law by Minnesota’s Democratic Gov. Mark Dayton, the law would apply to all current and future life insurance contracts.

WND reported last August on Omar’s political agenda and background.

Omar gave two victory speeches that night, one in English and the other in Somali. She has lived for nearly two decades in the Cedar Riverside community, a section of Minneapolis often referred to as “Little Mogadishu.” It has the highest concentration of Somali refugees of any area in the country. They have been placed there by the U.S. State Department’s refugee resettlement program and its taxpayer-funded contractors since at least 1994 and the arrivals continue to this day.

Somalis have been arriving in America at a rate of 500 to 700 a month ever since, distributed by federal resettlement contractors like Catholic Charities and Lutheran Social Services into more than 200 cities and towns for permanent resettlement.

More than 95 percent of refugees sent to America are selected by the United Nations.

Rep. Joe Hoppe, the bill’s sponsor, said terrorists “should not benefit” from taking out a life insurance policy.

“You should not be able to provide for your heirs or whoever you want by increasing your life insurance policy.”

Democratic Rep. Laurie Halverson said it was “unfortunate” these bills have to be passed but added that this safeguard will help keep insurance rates down.

“I’m very proud of Minnesota state Sen. Warren Limmer and his House counterpart, Rep. Hoppe,” former Congresswoman Michele Bachmann told WND.

“They bravely took on Minnesota’s politically correct critics who flinch at preventing beneficiaries from benefiting from terror-inspired life insurance purchases.”

Bachmann said Minnesota media have long insisted that Minnesotans should never criticize anything having to do with Islam.

“This is a refreshing move and sends a strong signal. Now the question is whether Dem Governor Mark Dayton will veto the bill.”

Confirmed: John Brennan Colluded With Foreign Spies to Defeat Trump

The American Spectator, by George Neumayr, April 19, 2017:

In article in the Guardian last week provides more confirmation that John Brennan was the American progenitor of political espionage aimed at defeating Donald Trump. One side did collude with foreign powers to tip the election — Hillary’s.

Seeking to retain his position as CIA director under Hillary, Brennan teamed up with British spies and Estonian spies to cripple Trump’s candidacy. He used their phony intelligence as a pretext for a multi-agency investigation into Trump, which led the FBI to probe a computer server connected to Trump Tower and gave cover to Susan Rice, among other Hillary supporters, to spy on Trump and his people.

John Brennan’s CIA operated like a branch office of the Hillary campaign, leaking out mentions of this bogus investigation to the press in the hopes of inflicting maximum political damage on Trump. An official in the intelligence community tells TAS that Brennan’s retinue of political radicals didn’t even bother to hide their activism, decorating offices with “Hillary for president cups” and other campaign paraphernalia.

A supporter of the American Communist Party at the height of the Cold War, Brennan brought into the CIA a raft of subversives and gave them plum positions from which to gather and leak political espionage on Trump. He bastardized standards so that these left-wing activists could burrow in and take career positions. Under the patina of that phony professionalism, they could then present their politicized judgments as “non-partisan.”

The Guardian story is written in a style designed to flatter its sources (they are cast as high-minded whistleblowers), but the upshot of it is devastating for them, nonetheless, and explains why all the criminal leaks against Trump first originated in the British press. According to the story, Brennan got his anti-Trump tips primarily from British spies but also Estonian spies and others. The story confirms that the seed of the espionage into Trump was planted by Estonia. The BBC’s Paul Wood reported last year that the intelligence agency of an unnamed Baltic State had tipped Brennan off in April 2016 to a conversation purporting to show that the Kremlin was funneling cash into the Trump campaign.

Any other CIA director would have disregarded such a flaky tip, recognizing that Estonia was eager to see Trump lose (its officials had bought into Hillary’s propaganda that Trump was going to pull out of NATO and leave Baltic countries exposed to Putin). But Brennan opportunistically seized on it, as he later that summer seized on the half-baked intelligence of British spy agencies (also full of officials who wanted to see Trump lose).

The Guardian says that British spy head Robert Hannigan “passed material in summer 2016 to the CIA chief, John Brennan.” To ensure that these flaky tips leaked out, Brennan disseminated them on Capitol Hill. In August and September of 2016, he gave briefings to the “Gang of Eight” about them, which then turned up on the front page of the New York Times.

All of this took place at the very moment Brennan was auditioning for Hillary. He desperately wanted to keep his job and despised Trump for his alleged “Muslim ban,” a matter near and dear to Brennan’s heart. Not only was he an apologist for the Muslim Brotherhood, but Brennan’s Islamophilia dated to his days in college, when he spent a year in Cairo learning Arabic and taking courses in Middle Eastern studies. He later got a graduate degree with an emphasis in Middle Eastern studies. In 1996, his ties to the Islamic world tightened after he became the CIA’s station chief in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. He once recalled that “during a 25-year career in government, I was privileged to serve in positions across the Middle East — as a political officer with the State Department and as a CIA station chief in Saudi Arabia. In Saudi Arabia, I saw how our Saudi partners fulfilled their duty as custodians of the two holy mosques of Mecca and Medina. I marveled at the majesty of the Hajj and the devotion of those who fulfilled their duty as Muslims by making that privilege — that pilgrimage.”

Out of this Islamophilia came a special dislike of Michael Flynn, who had planned to rip up the Obama-era “reset” with Muslim countries. Furious with Flynn for his apostasy from political correctness, Brennan and other Obama aides couldn’t resist the temptation to take him out after rifling through transcripts of his calls with the Russian ambassador. They caught him in a lie to Mike Pence and made sure the press knew about it.

Were the media not so completely in the tank for Obama and Hillary, all of this political mischief would make for a compelling 2016 version of All the President’s Men. Instead, the public gets a steady stream of Orwellian propaganda about the sudden propriety of political espionage. The headline writers at Pravda couldn’t improve on this week’s official lie, tweeted out by the Maggie Habermans: “Susan Rice Did Nothing Wrong, Say Both Dem and Republican House Aides.”

Liberals pompously quote the saying — “the bigger the lie, the more it will be believed” — even as their media enshrine it. Historians will look back on 2016 and marvel at the audacity of its big lie: whispers of an imaginary Trump-Russia collusion that wafted up from the fever swamps of a real collusion between John Brennan and foreign powers seeking Trump’s defeat.

Did the Obama Administration’s Abuse of Foreign Intelligence start before Trump?

One clue: The Russia story is a replay of how the former White House smeared pro-Israel activists in the lead-up to the Iran Deal

Tablet Magazine, by  Lee Smith, April 5, 2017:

The accusation that the Obama administration used information gleaned from classified foreign surveillance to smear and blackmail its political opponents at home has gained new traction in recent days, after reports that former National Security Adviser Susan Rice may have been rifling through classified transcripts for over a year that could have included information about Donald Trump and his associates. While using resources that are supposed to keep Americans safe from terrorism for other purposes may be a dereliction of duty, it is no more of a crime than spending all day on Twitter instead of doing your job. The crime here would be if she leaked the names of U.S. citizens to reporters. In the end, the seriousness of the accusation against Rice and other former administration officials who will be caught up in the “unmasking” scandal will rise or fall based on whether or not Donald Trump was actively engaged in a conspiracy to turn over the keys of the White House to the Kremlin. For true believers in the Trump-Kremlin conspiracy theories, the Obama “spying and lying” scandal isn’t a scandal at all; just public officials taking prudent steps to guard against an imminent threat to the republic.

But what if Donald Trump wasn’t the first or only target of an Obama White House campaign of spying and illegal leaks directed at domestic political opponents?

In a December 29, 2015 article, The Wall Street Journal described how the Obama administration had conducted surveillance on Israeli officials to understand how Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israeli officials, like Ambassador Ron Dermer, intended to fight the Iran Deal. The Journal reported that the targeting “also swept up the contents of some of their private conversations with U.S. lawmakers and American-Jewish groups.”

Despite this reporting, it seemed inconceivable at the time that—given myriad legal, ethical, political, and historical concerns, as well as strict National Security Agency protocols that protect the identity of American names caught in intercepts—the Obama White House would have actually spied on American citizens. In a December 31, 2016, Tablet article on the controversy, “Why the White House Wanted Congress to Think It Was Being Spied on By the NSA,” I argued that the Obama administration had merely used the appearance of spying on American lawmakers to corner opponents of the Iran Deal. Spying on U.S. citizens would be a clear abuse of the foreign-intelligence surveillance system. It would be a felony offense to leak the names of U.S. citizens to the press.

Increasingly, I believe that my conclusion in that piece was wrong. I believe the spying was real and that it was done not in an effort to keep the country safe from threats—but in order to help the White House fight their domestic political opponents.

“At some point, the administration weaponized the NSA’s legitimate monitoring of communications of foreign officials to stay one step ahead of domestic political opponents,” says a pro-Israel political operative who was deeply involved in the day-to-day fight over the Iran Deal. “The NSA’s collections of foreigners became a means of gathering real-time intelligence on Americans engaged in perfectly legitimate political activism—activism, due to the nature of the issue, that naturally involved conversations with foreigners. We began to notice the White House was responding immediately, sometimes within 24 hours, to specific conversations we were having. At first, we thought it was a coincidence being amplified by our own paranoia. After a while, it simply became our working assumption that we were being spied on.”

This is what systematic abuse of foreign-intelligence collection for domestic political purposes looks like: Intelligence collected on Americans, lawmakers, and figures in the pro-Israel community was fed back to the Obama White House as part of its political operations. The administration got the drop on its opponents by using classified information, which it then used to draw up its own game plan to block and freeze those on the other side. And—with the help of certain journalists whose stories (and thus careers) depend on high-level access—terrorize them.

Once you understand how this may have worked, it becomes easier to comprehend why and how we keep being fed daily treats of Trump’s nefarious Russia ties. The issue this time isn’t Israel, but Russia, yet the basic contours may very well be the same.

***

Two inquiries now underway on Capitol Hill, conducted by the Senate intelligence committee and the House intelligence committee, may discover the extent to which Obama administration officials unmasked the identities of Trump team members caught in foreign-intelligence intercepts. What we know so far is that Obama administration officials unmasked the identity of one Trump team member, Michael Flynn, and leaked his name to the Washington Post’s David Ignatius.

“According to a senior U.S. government official,” Ignatius wrote in his Jan. 12 column, “Flynn phoned Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak several times on Dec. 29, the day the Obama administration announced the expulsion of 35 Russian officials as well as other measures in retaliation for the hacking. What did Flynn say, and did it undercut the U.S. sanctions?”

Nothing, the Times and the Post later reported. But exposing Flynn’s name in the intercept for political purposes was an abuse of the national-security apparatus, and leaking it to the press is a crime.

This is familiar territory. In spying on the representatives of the American people and members of the pro-Israel community, the Obama administration learned how far it could go in manipulating the foreign-intelligence surveillance apparatus for its own domestic political advantage. In both instances, the ostensible targets—Israel and Russia—were simply instruments used to go after the real targets at home.

In order to spy on U.S. congressmen before the Iran Deal vote, the Obama administration exploited a loophole, which is described in the original Journal article. The U.S. intelligence community is supposed to keep tabs on foreign officials, even those representing allies. Hence, everyone in Washington knows that Israeli Ambassador Ron Dermer is under surveillance. But it’s different for his American interlocutors, especially U.S. lawmakers, whose identities are, according to NSA protocol, supposed to be, at the very least, redacted. But the standard for collecting and disseminating “intercepted communications involving U.S. lawmakers” is much less strict if it is swept up through “foreign-foreign” intercepts, for instance between a foreign ambassador and his capital. Washington, i.e. the seat of the American government, is where foreign ambassadors are supposed to meet with American officials. The Obama administration turned an ancient diplomatic convention inside out—foreign ambassadors were so dangerous that meeting them signaled betrayal of your own country.

During the long and contentious lead-up to the Iran Deal the Israeli ambassador was regularly briefing senior officials in Jerusalem, including the prime minister, about the situation, including his meetings with American lawmakers and Jewish community leaders. The Obama administration would be less interested in what the Israelis were doing than in the actions of those who actually had the ability to block the deal—namely, Senate and House members. The administration then fed this information to members of the press, who were happy to relay thinly veiled anti-Semitic conceits by accusing deal opponents of dual loyalty and being in the pay of foreign interests.

It didn’t take much imagination for members of Congress to imagine their names being inserted in the Iran deal echo chamber’s boilerplate—that they were beholden to “donors” and “foreign lobbies.” What would happen if the White House leaked your phone call with the Israeli ambassador to a friendly reporter, and you were then profiled as betraying the interests of your constituents and the security of your nation to a foreign power? What if the fact of your phone call appeared under the byline of a famous columnist friendly to the Obama administration, say, in a major national publication?

To make its case for the Iran Deal, the Obama administration redefined America’s pro-Israel community as agents of Israel. They did something similar with Trump and the Russians—whereby every Russian with money was defined as an agent of the state. Where the Israeli ambassador once was poison, now the Russian ambassador is the kiss of death—a phone call with him led to Flynn’s departure from the White House and a meeting with him landed Attorney General Jeff Sessions in hot water.

Did Trump really have dealings with FSB officers? Thanks to the administration’s whisper campaigns, the facts don’t matter; that kind of contact is no longer needed to justify surveillance, whose spoils could then be weaponized and leaked. There are oligarchs who live in Trump Tower, and they all know Putin—ergo, talking to them is tantamount to dealing with the Russian state.

Yet there is one key difference between the two information operations that abused the foreign-intelligence surveillance apparatus for political purposes. The campaign to sell the Iran deal was waged while the Obama administration was in office. The campaign to tie down Trump with the false Russia narrative was put together as the Obama team was on its way out.

The intelligence gathered from Iran Deal surveillance was shared with the fewest people possible inside the administration. It was leaked to only a few top-shelf reporters, like the authors of The Wall Street Journal article, who showed how the administration exploited a loophole to spy on Congress. Congressmen and their staffs certainly noticed, as did the Jewish organizations that were being spied on. But the campaign was mostly conducted sotto voce, through whispers and leaks that made it clear what the price of opposition might be.

The reason the prior abuse of the foreign-intelligence surveillance apparatus is clear only now is because the Russia campaign has illuminated it. As The New York Times reported last month, the administration distributed the intelligence gathered on the Trump transition team widely throughout government agencies, after it had changed the rules on distributing intercepted communications. The point of distributing the information so widely was to “preserve it,” the administration and its friends in the press explained—“preserve” being a euphemism for “leak.” The Obama team seems not to have understood that in proliferating that material they have exposed themselves to risk, by creating a potential criminal trail that may expose systematic abuse of foreign-intelligence collection.