Could man vying to become first Muslim governor be part of stealth jihad?

Jihad Watch, by Christine Douglass-Williams, Aug. 10, 2017:

The 32-year old Dr. Abdul el-Sayed recently announced his campaign for governor of Michigan. Winning the November 18 election would make him America’s first Muslim governor. The charming el-Sayed knows well how to talk the talk in putting Americans at ease. According to Dick Manasseri, spokesman for the group, Secure Michigan, which educates about the threat of Shariah law: “He’s young, attractive, he does not give out a lot of information, he speaks in platitudes about celebrating inclusiveness and diversity.” Manasseri “predicts that Sayed will at least win the Democratic nomination for governor” and warns that “America is headed down a suicidal path” through a stealth invasion. His words are not without merit:

El-Sayed has substantial connections to the Muslim Brotherhood in both his past and present. So the suspicion that El-Sayed may harbor Islamist convictions and be a Trojan horse are not unfounded, especially given the reality of what some have dubbed a “stealth jihad.”

Linda Sarsour, who called for jihad against the American government in early July, also threw her backing behind El-Sayed in an address she made to the Islamic Society of North America’s 54th annual convention:

When I think about building power, I think about brothers like Abdul Sayed, who is in this room today, who is running to become the first Muslim Governor of the state of Michigan

El-Sayed was sitting in the audience as Sarsour went on to urge the crowd to donate to his political campaign, an increasing pattern in the West, where Muslims are actively solicited to influence election outcomes.

For instance, a company called Jetpac Incorporated focuses on “training Muslim Americans how to leverage social media, data analysis and other critical political tools to build winning campaigns for city council, school committee and other down ballot races.” Jetpac also operates a “separate political action committee” called the Jetpac Action Fund, which raises money for Muslim candidates.

The article below points out that the “liberal convictions” expressed by El-Sayed “don’t seem very congruent with some of El-Sayed’s past and present associations.” This is typical of those Muslims with proven connections to Muslim Brotherhood entities who have made their way into the political arena. For example, while El-Sayed was a student at the University of Michigan, he was “an active member and vice-president of the Muslim Students’ Association (MSA) – a group founded mainly by members of the Muslim Brotherhood for the express purpose of spreading Wahhabist ideology — an austere form of Islam that insists on literal interpretation of the Quran and views those who disagree as enemies.”

Like all Western nations, the stealth invasion of American civilization continues from within with great fervor, while most remain too unaware and passive to stymie its advance.

“Could Man Vying to Become First Muslim Governor Be Part of ‘Stealth Jihad’?”, by Julie Roys, Christian Post, August 9, 2017:

Abdul El-Sayed, potentially the nation’s first Muslim governor, sounds like the quintessential progressive politician. According to his website, the Michigan Democrat upholds “strict separation of church and state,” and vows to “defend the right of all Americans to pray as they choose.” He also opposes discrimination against the LGBTQ community, and supports a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants.

This son of Egyptian immigrants also has an impeccable pedigree for public office. He’s a Rhodes Scholar with a bachelor’s degree from the University of Michigan, a doctorate in Public Health from Oxford University, and an M.D. from Columbia University’s College of Physicians and Surgeons. In 2015, when El-Sayed was just 30 years old, he was appointed executive director of the Detroit Health Department, becoming the youngest health commissioner ever to serve a major U.S. city.

Not surprisingly, those opposing El-Sayed’s candidacy, claiming he has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and is being groomed by far-left billionaire George Soros to become the “next Barack Obama,” are being dubbed Islamophobes and conspiracy theorists. In a Vice article, Muslim journalist Beenish Ahmed attributed the allegations to a “vile political climate” and “right-wing paranoia about Sharia law.”

El-Sayed denies any ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. And according to one fact-checking website, though El-Sayed received a fellowship to attend medical school from the foundation of Paul and Daisy Soros (George Soros’s older brother and his wife), “there’s no indication that George Soros is tied to the foundation, or to El-Sayad.”

The problem, however, is that despite these vehement denials and inconclusive evidence tying El-Sayed to George Soros, El-Sayed has substantial connections to the Muslim Brotherhood in both his past and present. So the suspicion that El-Sayed may harbor Islamist convictions and be a Trojan horse are not unfounded, especially given the reality of what some have dubbed a “stealth jihad.”

El-Sayed and the Brotherhood Stealth Model

According to the Middle East Forum, the Muslim Brotherhood differs from other radical jihadist groups in strategy, but not in goals. Both the Brotherhood and groups like ISIS seek to destroy the West and establish Sharia, or Islamic, law. But while groups like ISIS promote a military means of conquering the West, the Brotherhood, as stated in its internal documents, seeks to penetrate and destroy Western civilization from within — “‘sabotaging’ its miserable house by their (own) hands.”

As a result, the Brotherhood tends to be “more deceptive in language and appearance,” actively recruiting Muslim professionals and intellectuals, who can infiltrate Western legal and social systems without detection.

As one correspondent with the Middle East Forum put it, both the Brotherhood and militant jihadists will “shout Allahu Akbar and bomb Israel, support jihad, and support the violation of the rights of women and non-Muslims. One will do it openly and loudly while wearing his primitive Islamic dress and his untidy beard, but the other will be a PhD holder from Oxford University or the Sorbonne, and he will do it cunningly and secretly while wearing his German or French suit and a tidy beard, from an air-conditioned office, all the while making deals with the Americans.”

So the ideal Brotherhood politician would be someone who secretly harbors radical Islamic convictions, but looks, acts, and talks like a mainstream, major-party candidate. This candidate would not hide his Muslim identity, but instead would leverage it for political advantage, making Islam sound moderate and appealing to values like multiculturalism.

Publicly, El-Sayed espouses a very tolerant form of Islam, once remarking that he was running for public office “because of the values my Islam teaches me” like beliefs in “equity” and “the fundamental rights of all people.” El-Sayed also frequently talks about people of different faiths coming together, upholding his “extremely diverse” family as a model. (El-Sayed’s father, Mohamed El-Sayed, married a white woman who converted to Islam. So now, through his step-mother, El-Sayed has a grandmother who’s a Presbyterian and apparently, an uncle who’s an atheist.)

Yet these espoused liberal convictions don’t seem very congruent with some of El-Sayed’s past and present associations, prompting suspicions that he fits the stealth Brotherhood profile. While a student at the University of Michigan, El-Sayed was “an active member” and vice-president of the Muslim Students’ Association (MSA) – a group founded mainly by members of the Muslim Brotherhood for the express purpose of spreading Wahhabist ideology — an austere form of Islam that insists on literal interpretation of the Quran and views those who disagree as enemies.

The MSA bills itself as a networking and support group for Muslim students. But according to terrorism expert Patrick Poole, the MSA “has been a virtual terror factory. Time after time after time again, we see these terrorists . . . MSA leaders, MSA presidents, MSA national presidents — who’ve been implicated, charged and convicted in terrorist plots.”

The extensive list of MSA terrorists includes Anwar al-Awlaki, an al-Queda senior recruiter and organizer who was the first U.S. citizen to be targeted and killed in a U.S. drone strike. During his tenure at Colorado State University, al-Awlaki was president of the campus MSA. Similarly, Ramy Zamzam, convicted in Pakistan for attempting to join the Taliban and kill U.S. troops, was president of the MSA’s Washington, D.C. council. And then there’s Omar Shafik Hammami, the former president of the MSA at the University of South Alabama, who abandoned his wife and infant daughter to join the terrorist group Al-Shabaab in Somalia.

The MSA’s pledge is almost identical to that of the Muslim Brotherhood and states, “Allah is my lord. Islam is my life. . . . Jihad is my spirit. Paradise is my goal. I will die to establish Islam.” As an executive in an MSA chapter, El-Sayed certainly would have recited this pledge repeatedly.

I emailed El-Sayed’s office, inquiring about his prior involvement with the MSA, but it did not respond. The office also denied my request for an interview.

El-Sayed’s involvement with the MSA, however, is not his only association that raises red flags. El-Sayed’s father-in-law is Dr. Jakaku Tayeb, former president and current board member of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) Michigan.

Like the MSA, CAIR purports to be mainstream — simply a “grassroots civil rights and advocacy group.” Yet many have asserted that it’s really a terror group with board members and staff who have been accused and/or convicted of terrorist charges. In 2007, CAIR was actually named by federal prosecutors as “unindicted co-conspirators” in a criminal plot to support the terrorist group Hamas.

Some, like Dick Manasseri, spokesman for Secure Michigan, have also expressed concerns that El-Sayed wants to promote Sharia law. There’s no doubt that El-Sayed and his wife, Sarah Jakaku, are Sharia compliant. Jakaku wears a hijab in public. And in a 2010 radio interview about his courtship and marriage, El-Sayed said he didn’t touch his wife when they were courting because “in my interpretation of Islamic law, I wasn’t allowed to touch her until after we were married.”

Of course, these are personal matters, which would seemingly have no bearing on holding public office. However, according to Manasseri, “Sharia adherents believe … that Sharia is the supreme law and takes precedence over any man-made law.”

This makes El-Sayed’s support for making Michigan the nation’s first “sanctuary state” especially disconcerting. Adopting sanctuary status would mean giving the state permission to defy federal immigration officers and essentially, violate the U.S. Constitution. This, Manasseri said, would open the door for legal pluralism, which many see as a first step to embracing Sharia…..

Muslim Brotherhood an ‘incubator’ for U.S. terror

A CAIR ad strikes a decidedly peaceful tone, but its real agenda is to influence American society in favor of Islamism. The federal government identified CAIR as an entity of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee, a secret body set up to advance Hamas’ agenda.

WND, by Leo Hohmann, May 1, 2017:

An Islamist is an Islamist is an Islamist – and just because movements like the Muslim Brotherhood preach non-violence does not mean they are entirely peaceful, because they just may be poisoning the minds of the next generation of jihadists.

That’s the finding of a new study that traces the development of 100 prominent jihadists within the global Islamic movement.

Half of the jihadists profiled by Centre on Religion & Geopolitics had ties to supposedly non-violent Islamists, but they easily made the transition to the dark side in which they targeted innocent civilians with bombs, bullets or blades.

The term “Islamist” is used to describe supporters of fundamentalist Islam who are working toward the implementation of Shariah law, whether by peaceful or violent means.

But the study’s authors – in exploring “pathways to militancy” among 100 prominent Islamic terrorists – found there is often a fine line that separates the two sides of the Islamist coin.

The 100 men studied all have their ethnic roots in the Middle East and Africa but span multiple generations. The authors found that ties to non-violent Islamist organizations can often influence a person’s trajectory toward terrorism.

This is where individuals get schooled in the ideological principles of Shariah and jihad before “graduating” to the next level of actually carrying out attacks, according to the study.

A majority, 51 percent, of the terrorists under study were previously connected to Islamist groups that claim to be non-violent, including “bodies that are not necessarily political activist organizations but form a functioning arm of existing Islamist groups, such as youth wings, student associations, and other societies.”

Senior al-Qaida leaders, including Osama bin Laden, Khalid Sheik Muhammad, Anwar al-Awlaki and current head man Ayman al-Zawihiri were all involved with or direct members of the Muslim Brotherhood before they became terrorist kingpins.

The Trump administration, after first signaling it would declare the Muslim Brotherhood a foreign terrorist organization, backed off once Trump took office. A report last month by the Washington Times said Trump has decided to heed the advice of the U.S. State Department and the King of Jordan to not go after the Brotherhood.

One in four of the jihadists examined had ties to the Muslim Brotherhood or one of its front groups.

“Our data links the leaders of Jabhat al-Nusra and ISIS today to the forefathers of the movement through people they met in prison, at university, and on the battlefield,” write the authors.

Steven Emerson, publisher of the Investigative Project on Terrorism.

Steve Emerson, executive director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism, said the findings support the theory that non-violent Islamist groups “not only serve as potential incubators for radicalization and violence.”

They also continue to engage in violent incitement, encouraging others to carry out terrorist attacks, Emerson said.

It is the failure to recognize the role of non-violent jihadists that causes the FBI and other law enforcement agencies to lose the battle against terrorists, contends John Guandolo, a former FBI counter-terrorism specialist.

John Guandolo

One lesson from the recent debacle in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, in which former Saudi resident Ehab Jaber was allowed to threaten a Christian conference while brandishing five guns and 1,200 rounds of ammo, brought to center stage is that many leaders cannot discern friend from foe in the war against an energized Islamic movement, Guandolo said.

“This exposes Americans to greater danger each day,” he said on his blog, Understanding the Threat.

Here are a few examples Guandolo cites:

  • Abdurabman Alamoudi was the most prominent Islamic leader in the United States in the 1990s. He founded or led major Islamic organizations, including the Muslim Student Association. He created the Muslim chaplain program for the Department of Defense, was a “Goodwill Ambassador” for the State Department and was the Islamic adviser 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 with $340,000 cash he received from the Libyan government for the global jihad. As the U.S. government later admitted, Alamoudi was a financier for al-Qaida. He was sentenced to 23 years in prison. The sentence was reduced under President Obama’s administration by six years. He will be released in three 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, receiving awards from the FBI and lectures at CIA headquarters. He worked with the Obama administration and was publicly lauded by the president’s deputy national security adviser, Denis McDonough. Until 2014, Magid was the president of the largest Islamic organization in U.S., the Islamic Society of North America, or ISNA – which also happens to be, according to the Department of Justice, a Muslim Brotherhood organization that directly funds the terrorist group Hamas. Magid was recently given another award by FBI Director James Comey.

Imam Mohamed Magid at National Prayer Service held at the National Cathedral in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 21, 2017

  • Anwar al-Awlaki was called the “new face of moderate Islam” by some in the media, including NPR and PBS. He gave lectures inside the U.S. Capitol about Islam’s prophet Muhammad and spoke at the Pentagon while he was served as imam of the Dar al Hijra Islamic Center in Virginia. This “moderate” Muslim was killed in September 2011 by a U.S. drone strike because he was the leader of al-Qaida in Yemen.

Anwar al-Awlaki was an American-born imam of Yemeni descent who was ordered killed in a drone strike by President Obama.

  • Suhail Khan works for Microsoft and has been given access to inner circles of the Republican Party. On Sept. 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. Khan is the son of one of the most influential Muslim Brotherhood leaders in the U.S. ISNA has an annual award named after his father. Khan publicly lauds his deceased father and proudly proclaims the mantra that Muslims love death more than unbelievers love life.
  • Siraj Wahhaj was the first imam to offer prayers inside the U.S. House of Representatives. Wahhaj is an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and was a character witness for the Blind Sheik, convicted for his part in a number of terrorist plots in the U.S.
  • On any given day, Nihad Awad can be found walking the halls of Congress, on CNN or Fox News programs, or meeting with Christian or Jewish leaders around the nation as a part of “outreach.” Local and national media promote Awad’s organization, the Council on American Islamic Relations, or CAIR, as a “civil rights organization,” and they go to great lengths to defend the group. The Justice Department identifies CAIR as a member of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee, which is Hamas. Awad is the leader of Hamas in the U.S. and – in UTT’s opinion – is also the guide/leader of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood.CAIR has sued the authors of a WND Books exposé, “Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That’s Conspiring to Islamize America,” which documented the group’s radical ties. A trial in the case is expected to commence this fall.

“American citizens, your leaders across the board, of both political parties, have proven they are incapable of discerning friend from foe,” Guandolo concludes. “This war will be won at the local level or it will be lost. Local sheriffs and pastors are the key.”

***

Also see:

Islamic Movement in U.S. Preparing for Battle

Understanding the Threat, by John Guandolo, Sept. 13, 2016:

For UTT followers who are accustomed to brief articles, this is a longer article because it needs to be.  This is an important topic and needs a little more attention.  Please read this carefully because the implications are significant.  JG

As UTT has continually reported, there exists in the United States a significant jihadi movement led primarily by the Muslim Brotherhood whose organizations include the most prominent and influential Islamic groups in America.

weapons2

The Islamic Movement in the U.S. continues their daily work of preparing for the coming battle at all levels of the society.  From a military standpoint, the leaders of the American Muslim community are coalescing their forces and preparing strategically, operationally, and logistically for war.

Strategic Overlay

Going back to the early 1980’s, the jihadis set up an elaborate network of jihadi centers known in the U.S. as the Al Kifah Refugee Centers to recruit jihadis for the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan.  Some of these over three dozen offices were operated by only a couple jihadis with a phone or fax machine, and some had a more sizable presence in the community.  Nevertheless, they created nodes across the United States for jihadis in many American cities, and became centers for possible Al Qaeda recruitment in the future.

For the last few decades the Pakistani terrorist organization known as Jamaat al Fuqra has been establishing jihadi training camps in the United States primarily among black Muslims, many of whom were recruited in prison.  Known in the U.S. as “Muslims of America” or “MOA,” approximately two dozen of the three dozen known camps appear to be operational today.

In the early 1990’s the Chief Investigator for the state of Colorado, with support from the Governor and Attorney General, launched a multi-jurisdictional raid of an MOA compound near Buena Vista (CO) and discovered weapons, explosives, lists of people to be assassinated, evidence that military/national guard bases had been under surveillance, and the like.

In one of the gems discovered in the 2004 FBI raid of the Annandale, Virginia home of a senior Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas leader, a recording of a senior Muslim Brotherhood leader speaking to a group of Muslim Brothers in Missouri revealed the MB has numerous training camps inside America and conducted regular firearms training.

To be clear, they are not planning on conducting violent actions in the immediate future, but are planning for “Zero Hour” – their term for when the violent jihad will begin when the time is right.  They may wait until an outside influence from a foreign power or a major event initiates conflict, and then the Islamic Movement can begin the jihad and act independently or as an ally for a hostile foreign power such as Iran or China.

In the MB’s 5-Phase “World Underground Movement Plan” – discovered at the 2004 FBI raid in Annandale, Virginia – the Brotherhood states (Phase 2) they must “Establish a government (secret) within the government.”  The purpose of this is to have jihadis on the inside of our government who will serve as the leadership for the Islamic Movement when they seize power in the United States.  Until then, their role is to (1) gather intelligence and (2) conduct influence operations at all levels of the society, especially within the decision-making process.

As has previously been discussed, this is much more a counterintelligence and espionage issue than it is a “terrorism” matter.  The enemy is preparing the battlefield now for the eventual battle to come.

The U.S. Network

The evidence in the largest terrorism financing and Hamas trial ever successfully prosecuted in American history (US v Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, Dallas 2008) reveals the most prominent Islamic organizations in the U.S. are a part of a massive jihadi network whose stated objective is to wage “Civilization Jihad” to destroy our system of government and establish an Islamic State (caliphate) under sharia here.  The evidence also reveals the Muslim Brotherhood Islamic Centers/Mosques are the places at which jihadi train for battle and from which the jihad will be launched.

All of the mosques our military entered during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and mosques that European authorities have raided in the last two years have had weapons in them.  The mosque is what Mohammad used a mosque for, and the launch point for jihad is one of those purposes.

There are over 2400 Islamic Centers/Mosques in America, most of which are a part of the MB’s jihadi network.

In the United States the “nucleus” for the Islamic Movement is the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) whose subsidiary Islamic Societies number approximately 170.  The Muslim Students Associations (MSA) serve as a recruiting arm for jihadis, and there are over 700 chapters on nearly every major college campus in America.

Reports from around the country from civilian and law enforcement sources reveal:  Mosques and Islamic organizations are being built in strategic locations – near key infrastructure facilities, military bases, or some other key position in the community; taxi cab drivers at the largest airports in the U.S. are Muslim; and there is a noticeable increase in sharia-compliant Muslim TSA officers, baggage handlers and airline/airport employees at U.S. airports.

Additionally:  Muslims are purchasing hotels, quick marts, and 7-11 type stores with gas stations, and  a majority of major hotels in cities across the U.S. have a manager or assistant manager who is a Muslim, which is statistically impossible unless this activity is intentional.

Quick marts and gas stations provide their Movement with a logistics train that will be needed in a battle. Having people in leadership positions at major hotels in major cities, where law enforcement and intelligence groups and others hold conferences, serve as excellent intelligence gathering nodes.

Jihadis have penetrated U.S. federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies giving them access to sensitive intelligence systems, while simultaneously they have shut down real threat-based training inside these same agencies under the guise factual/truth-based training is “offensive to Muslims.”

Jihadis have themselves penetrated senior levels of the government (eg Suhail Khan working for two successive Secretaries of Transportation with access to classified critical infrastructure details), and have recruited senior U.S. government officials to promote and protect their interests which are hostile to the U.S. (most recent example – Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson promoting and defending leading MB organization ISNA and speaking at their annual convention expressly to open the door to more Cabinet officials to do the same).

Key jihadi organizations, like Hamas (doing business as the Council on American Islamic Relations/CAIR) work on Capitol Hill and inside government agencies to keep truthful discussions about the Islamic threat from ever happening, while plotting to work with Al Qaeda (as evidenced by UTT’s Chris Gaubatz discovery of a CAIR document dated 3/08/04 at their headquarters in Washington, D.C. stating, “Attempt to understand Islamic movements in the area, and start supporting Islamic groups including Mr. bin Laden and his associates”).

urban-war

Now, the U.S. government is bringing tens of thousands of sharia adherent Muslims into our nation.  From the Islamic perspective, these people are Muhajaroun – those who make the hijra into the non-Muslim lands in preparation for the “Final Stage,” which is armed conflict with the host country.  This is all a part of their strategy, and is consistent with core Islamic doctrine.

Finally, we are currently observing the Marxist/Socialist Movement in the U.S. working directly with the Islamic Movement at the ground and strategic levels.  Both have publicly declared their support for one another, they are both receiving funding from hard-left Marxists/socialists (eg George Soros) and foreign powers, and both are openly pushing for confrontation with and the overthrow of the U.S. government.

The Islamic Movement in the United States is deeply embedded in the U.S. decision-making process, has thousands of organizations and allies, possesses a logistics train of fuel and supplies, conducts weapons training programs, has access to U.S. intelligence systems, is well funded (primarily by Iran, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, etc), has strategic plans for North America (An Explanatory Memorandum) and has a plan to implement the strategy (Implementation Manual) which they are following.

The U.S. response is to say “Islam is a religion of peace” and work with the very Muslim leaders who are driving this hostile network.

Victory is not possible with this recipe.

Each year there are between 70 and 120 new Islamic non-profits being created in America, most of which appear to be working directly in line with the Muslim Brotherhood’s plan to wage civilization jihad until “Zero Hour” when the war goes hot.

Until then, they continue to prep the battlefield because they are really at war with us because they are following sharia – core Islamic doctrine – as their blueprint for what they are doing.

****

EXPOSED: Writings of GWU’s ‘ex-jihadist’ reveal he’s not so reformed after all

george-washington-dcConservative Review, by Benjamin Weingarten, Sept. 11, 2016:

Among the inexplicable ways in which the United States has responded to Islamic supremacism in the 15 years since September 11 — beyond enabling the world’s leading state sponsor of jihad in Iran, supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and other “moderate jihadists” over relatively secular strongmen, and transitioning from a global war on terror (a tactic) to a program against “violent extremism” (a nebulous non-entity) — a recent story out of the American academy is quite telling.

George Washington University has given a research position within its Center for Cyber and Homeland Security to Jesse Morton (formerly known as Younus Abdullah Muhammad), an ex-jihadist sentenced to more than 11 years in prison for threatening the creators of “South Park” for depicting Muhammad in a bear suit.

Having chosen to serve as an informant for the FBI because of his expertise ‘jihadizing’ fellow Americans through Revolution Muslim (the Al Qaeda-supporting “activist” group that he led on U.S. soil), law enforcement officials and GWU firmly believe Morton is not only no longer a threat, but also an asset.

They believe there is much that can be learned from his experience transforming from regular American to jihadist and back again.

In his defense, some like Nadia Oweidat of the New America think tank have said that Morton’s decision to come out publicly as someone working to counter “radicalism” puts Morton’s life at risk.

Morton himself claims to have been rehabilitated through hours spent in prison supposedly grappling with the great works of the Western canon, such as the writings of John Locke and Thomas Paine, and his interactions with certain friendly law enforcement officers.

Law enforcement officials and GWU firmly believe Morton is not only no longer a threat, but also an asset.

He asserts that he is contrite and seeks to rectify his actions according to an interview with CNN, stating:

This is an opportunity for me to make amends, to some degree … I realize that I was completely wrong in my perspectives.

I suffer from a tremendous amount of guilt … I have seen things that people have done and to know that I once sympathized and supported that view — it sickens me.

Yet nowhere in Morton’s mea culpa is there an overt disavowal of Islamic supremacism, condemnation of Sharia law, or renunciation of his faith as in the case of other notable ex-Islamic supremacists like Hirsi Ali or ex-Communists like Whittaker Chambers.

Interestingly, Morton publicized his release from prison on an Islamic website, but that announcement as well as the website have since disappeared. As The Washington Post noted earlier this year:

Efforts to locate Morton, a father of two who has a master’s degree from Columbia University, were unsuccessful. The Bureau of Prisons website indicates that he was released in February 2015, and he appears to have announced it on the website islampolicy.com.

“While I am no doubt bewildered by the prospects of facing the currents of American society, labeled American Al-Qaeda, I do want to remain cognizant that this opportunity to be a freeman, a husband, a father, and citizen comes from Allah alone,” he wrote.

It turns out that Islampolicy.com was the successor website to Revolution Muslim. And this quotation captured by the Post, indicates that Morton remains a Muslim and harbors a victim-like mentality rather than acknowledging that he was the aggressor.

Thanks to the web archives, we can read further into Morton’s statement upon his release:

I remember being flown home in a private government jet after five months of incarceration in Morocco and finding out I was facing life imprisonment in the United States. At that moment, when one’s freedom seems to be lost forever, simply for speaking their mind, the soul has nothing left to do but turn to Allah, aza wa jaal. Today I can guarantee that a relief from hardship comes in ways that are mostly unexpected. The reflective one realizes that Allah relieves hardship in ways that oftentimes connect to pathways of deeper, spiritual healing the. Therefore, we must always pay attention to the experiences Allah puts us through, and try to remember that there are lessons to be learned from each and every passing wind. [Emphasis mine]

Clearly Morton viewed his arrest and release as being intrinsic to his Islamic experience and believed his arrest was unjustified. After all, he was just exercising his right to free speech.

Yet nowhere in Morton’s mea culpa is there an overt disavowal of Islamic supremacism, condemnation of Sharia law, or renunciation of his faith.

He continues:

I have been particularly intrigued by what has been classified as countering violent extremism (CVE). While this has led me to contemplate ways of preventing others from throwing their lives away, I remain staunchly opposed to the national security or counterterrorism state and its connection to the elite, neoliberal order, or what Dwight D. Eisenhower referred to as far back as 1961 as the ‘military-industrial complex.’ I believe that today’s counterterrorist, or national security state isn’t merely dangerous to Islam and Muslims, but to humanity and civilization generally.

I must also emphatically state that I absolutely reject the conception that terrorism is justified in any which way and by anybody. I ask Allah to accept repentance for my not having made that absolutely clear in the past. It seems to me definite that we are suffering from an era the prophet (saws) foretold; one marked by ignorant youth who recite the best of speech but do not embody it. If we are to truly stand for the ummah’s liberation, we will have to locate a balanced position between the day’s extremes. [Emphasis mine]

Morton’s views morphed from the jihadist notion that the Great Satan must be destroyed to the Left’s notion that efforts to root out and defeat jihadis represent an immoral, un-American, tyrannical enterprise.

Further, Morton puts forth the argument echoed by many Islamic supremacists that “terrorism,” is never justified. But as Daniel Greenfield has written, while some Islamic leaders have gone so far as to issue fatwas against terrorism, they fail to define the term:

Muslim religious leaders have occasionally issued fatwas against terrorism, but terrorism for Muslim clerics … is a matter of definition. The tactics of terrorism, including suicide bombing and the murder of civilians, have been approved by fatwas from many of the same Islamic religious leaders that our establishment deems moderate. And the objective of terrorism, the subjugation of non-Muslims, has been the most fundamental Islamic imperative for the expansionistic religion since the days of Mohammed.

How to square these sentiments? As Stephen Coughlin notes in his magnum opus, “Catastrophic Failure: Blindfolding America in the Face of Jihad,” the Quran’s definition of terrorism is essentially the killing of a Muslim without right. Is this the definition Morton had in mind when he proscribed terror?

In a later post from August 19, 2015 (note: the Wayback Machine page takes a few moments to load), “Obama’s Support for Sisi’s Counterterrorism Legislation Highlights the Hypocrisy of War on Radicalization,” Morton asserts,

[T]he global war on terror, having been rebranded as a war on Islamic extremism under Obama, has become a war on radicalization that now threatens the very essence of free expression democratic societies depend on.

Morton believes that targeting of individuals on the basis of jihadist ideology is in fact detrimental and that the goal of U.S. policy is to end “Islamism” (which of course would appear to be the exact opposite of President Obama’s policy with respect to the growing global jihad):

Legislation that concentrates on ideology conflates radical belief with violence and will only guarantee perpetual conflict. This seems to be the intended effect of counterterrorism policy everywhere. It suggests that the counterterrorism community itself desires confrontation to the end, until the very existence of Islamism on earth is eradicated.

This sentiment has expanded by way of rising right-wing and anti-Islamic populism. It is aided and abided by an Islamophobia industry that serves to brandish all conservative Muslims as barbarian. Whether in London, Paris, Cairo, or Washington, governments everywhere are utilizing counterterrorism policy and practice to silence dissent and criminalize critique of government policy, particularly if one is an Islamist.

Islamists apparently are the real victims during this age of jihadist metastasization.

While recasting himself as an agent for good with a new home in the academy, he airbrushes his views to make them palatable to a progressive audience.

Morton contends, hyperbolically, that ideology is not the key driver of jihadist violence, but rather that Western (imperialist) actions are the sine qua non of jihad — that again, jihadists are merely reacting to Western aggression:

[I]t is argued that all Islamists, nonviolent and violent, must be silenced. That position, given credence by way of government allegiance with ‘moderate Muslims’, is girded in the belief that radical political preachers create the ‘mood music to which suicide bombers dance.’ That’s a fancy way of saying that radical beliefs precede and incite violent action. In fact, very few of those holding radical beliefs ever go on to commit acts of terrorism and there is no established empirical evidence for such a causal relationship.

The one common denominator in the overwhelming majority of empirical research into violent Islamic extremist incidents is actually an attempt to justify or frame violence as a reaction to western policies. Yet, this fact conveniently goes missing from most expert analysis. When pointed to as the actual cause, any citation of western policy is ruled out as conspiracy theory or paranoid delusion. It is important to note that in exposition after exposition, Osama bin Laden claimed that jihadists were engaging in terrorism not because they hate democracy but “because you (the United States) attach us and continue to attack us.”

In other words, we create jihadis with our policy.

Apparently, ISIS also never cared about the West, until we meddled:

[T]he western press hardly recognizes that ISIS mostly rejected the ‘far enemy’ doctrine and instead preferred regional or localized violence, at least until Obama announced his plan to “degrade and destroy” the movement.

Most dumbfounding of all is this quote:

Were the U.S. and its allies not in such blatant betrayal of the very “set of core principles” Obama claimed to defend at the time of the Egyptian coup, there might be a diminishing appeal of jihadism. Instead, it’s viewed as the only alternative. The only solution is a global grassroots movement dedicated to ending such blatant hypocrisy. This movement must focus on dismantling the entire counterterrorism component of the military-industrial complex. Only then might a paradigm unfold that could first rid that “one indispensable nation” of its own despots and dictatorship, and thereby encourage people across the globe to do the same. Until then, terrorism at the hand of the state and Orwellian legislation will only enhance radicalization, at home and abroad. [Emphasis mine]

Thus, this deradicalized ex-jihadist proclaims that the way to end jihadism is to dismantle the “entire counterterrorism component” of American policy. No wonder he has been so welcomed at an American institution of higher education.

Here is one more excerpt from a May 2015 post regarding the U.S. government’s release of the list of books found at Osama bin Laden’s Abbottabad compound attributed to IslamPolicy.com and apparently written by Morton given a line in the article referencing a release from prison — “This Brave New World I’ve been set free in” — that is in some respects equally chilling:

I think that rather than rely on violence, Muslims with proper minhaj and aqeedah should come up with mechanisms for addressing the reality that people in power profit domestically from goading little kids into elaborate plots and that the military industrial complex profits immensely from war and chaos in the Muslim world.

One thing I realize about some of my previous work at Revolution Muslim was the way it allowed authorities o [sic] fulfill their own agenda. It was a lesson that all those seeking authentic Islam could benefit from. May Allah aza wa jaal liberate this ummah from its ignorance and give us insight to see through a massive propaganda war. We should be at the forefront of providing holistic socio-pschological-political-economic alternatives based in the shariah. [Emphasis mine]

Morton may have “evolved” from jihadist to a modern-day Edward Said — the ubiquitous “thought leader” of Middle Eastern departments at prestigious, self-righteously suicidal academic institutions across America. Said popularized the view of an ethnocentric, imperialist Western aggressor raping and pillaging in a peaceful Muslim world. But that is really beside the point.

Why are federal authorities and a think-tank at an academic institution theoretically dedicated to countering terrorism accepting someone like Morton with open arms? To repeat, he wants to dismantle America’s counterterrorism apparatus!

Why is someone who believes in promoting a system based in Sharia accepted into America’s national security establishment more broadly?

Morton may have put on a tie and apologized for his misdeeds, but based on his scrubbed public writings from just a year ago, he sounds a lot like other former “moderate,” “ex-radicals” in American history. While recasting himself as an agent for good with a new home in the academy, he airbrushes his views to make them palatable to a progressive audience.

Perhaps Morton will be the first in a wave of new Bill Ayerses, Kathy Boudins, and Angela Davises. The Obama administration does want to clear out Gitmo, and “jobs for reformed jihadis” has a nice ring to it.

Placing Terror on a Pedestal

CAIR, islamic terror, stealth jihad

CAIR, islamic terror, stealth jihad

Another jihadi operative slithers into the embrace of the USG….can DHS possibly be this clueless?! Please read the Aesop fable about the farmer & the snake: http://fablesofaesop.com/the-farmer-and-the-snake.html – Clare Lopez

Frontpage, by Joe Kaufman, April 29, 2016:

Ghazala Salam has embedded her life in groups associated with terror. This year, she left her job with CAIR, an organization that has been linked to terrorist financing and terrorist leaders, for a position with Emerge USA, a radical Muslim outfit attempting to push its way into the political arena. Yet, even with this sinister background, Salam has managed to achieve numerous honors from South Florida government and government-related institutions. Has she pulled the wool over everyone’s eyes or are they intentionally ignoring facts.

On April 12th, Ghazala Salam stood next to Broward County Commissioner Stacy Ritter and accepted a proclamation declaring that day ‘Equal Pay Day,’ “urging all employers in our community to recognize the full value of the skills and contributions of women in the labor force and recommit to making equal pay a reality.” Signing the proclamation was Broward County Mayor Marty Kiar.

On March 25th, Salam received the honor of speaking at the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Citizenship Ceremony, where new US citizens are sworn in. Emblazoned on the podium where she spoke from was a prominent Department of Homeland Security logo.

Photos and information regarding both of these events are found on the Facebook site of Emerge USA, an organization where Salam serves as its Florida State Director.

Emerge USA, despite its patriotic sounding name, has an extremely radical agenda based on terrorism and bigotry shrouded in the guise of political advocacy.

The main individual behind Emerge USA is Khurrum Wahid, a South Florida attorney who has built his name on representing high profile terrorists. They include members of al-Qaeda and financiers of the Taliban. According to the Miami New Times, Wahid himself was placed on a federal terrorist watch list in 2011.

Emerge sponsors speeches made by Muslim extremists, such as Islamic lecturer Sayed Ammar Nakshawani. Nakshawani, who is a follower of former Iran supreme leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, has previously called for the destruction of Israel. He has given featured talks in at least two Emerge benefit dinners, one in 2014 and one in 2015.

Emerge sponsors events at terror-linked mosques. One is Tampa-based al-Qassam (a.k.a. Islamic Community of Tampa), which was founded by Palestinian Islamic Jihad leader and former Khurrum Wahid client Sami al-Arian. Another is the Pembroke Pines-based Darul Uloom, where “Dirty Bomber” Jose Padilla was a student; where now-deceased al-Qaeda commander Adnan el-Shukrijumah was a prayer leader; and whose imam, Maulana Shafayat Mohamed, has been thrown off a number of boards in Broward County for his actions against homosexuals.

Salam has become close with Darul Uloom and its imam. A video of Salam being interviewed by Shafayat Mohamed for Darul Uloom’s media arm, Al-Hikmat, was published on the mosque’s website last June. Salam has been honored repeatedly in Al-Hikmat newsletters, and she was the recipient of an award at the 2015 annual Al-Hikmat award ceremony in May 2015. A photograph of her with Shafayat Mohamed is found on the website of the American Muslim Democratic Caucus of Florida (AMDCFL), a group that Salam presides over.

Earlier this year, prior to taking her job with Emerge, Salam held the position of Community and Government Relations Director for the Florida chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). She had been with CAIR in this position since February 2011.

CAIR was established in June 1994 as part of a terrorist umbrella group headed by then-global head of Hamas, Mousa Abu Marzook. In 2007 and 2008, CAIR was named by the US Justice Department a co-conspirator for two federal trials dealing with the financing of millions of dollars to Hamas. Since its founding, a number of CAIR representatives have served jail time and/or have been deported from the United States for terrorist-related crimes. In November 2014, CAIR itself was designated a terrorist group by the United Arab Emirates (UAE) government.

CAIR-Florida has fully reflected the extremism of its parent organization. Its Executive Director Hassan Shibly, who has previously denied that Hezbollah is a terrorist group, wrote in August 2014, “Israel and its supporters are enemies of God…” In July 2014, CAIR-Florida co-sponsored a pro-Hamas rally in Downtown Miami, where rally goers repeatedly shouted, “We are Hamas” and “Let’s go Hamas.” Following the rally, the event organizer, Sofian Zakkout, wrote, “Thank God, every day we conquer the American Jews like our conquests over the Jews of Israel!”

While working for Emerge, Salam has held joint events with CAIR. She has also held events with Nur-ul-Islam Academy (NUIA) and ICNA Relief.

Nur-ul-Islam Academy is the children’s school of the Cooper City-based Nur-ul-Islam Mosque. A former member of the mosque’s Islamic Affairs Council and ex-Vice President of NUIA, Raed Musa Awad, was the Florida representative for the Hamas charity, Holy Land Foundation (HLF). The website of NUIA previously contained links to violent, anti-Semitic and anti-Christian material, including having a link to islamway.com, a website that encouraged its viewers to donate money to Hamas. Emerge USA co-founder and trustee Saif Ishoof is a director of NUIA.

ICNA Relief is a function of the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), the American affiliate of South Asian Islamist group Jamaat-e-Islami (JI). JI’s militant wing, Hizbul Mujahideen, owned the Pakistani compound where Osama bin Laden was killed. ICNA has been linked to terrorist financing and has used the web to promote different terrorist groups, including Hamas, al-Qaeda, Hezbollah and the Taliban. ICNA conducts annual functions along with the Muslim American Society (MAS), which like CAIR, is a UAE designated terrorist organization.

None of this has stopped Salam from being granted a proclamation by a county mayor or from speaking at a US citizenship swearing-in ceremony. It also hasn’t stopped her from sitting on the board of the Broward County School Board’s Human Relations Committee or from serving as the Chairwoman of the Broward Commission on the Status of Women (CSW). And it hasn’t stopped her from being a director at the Broward League of Women Voters or from being the featured speaker at the League’s annual meeting, this month.

But it has done one thing. It has exposed a dangerous flaw within the community, whereby someone associated with Islamist terror has been embraced and not shunned.

Out of negligence or sheer ignorance, our community leaders have left us vulnerable to those who would wish us harm.

Maajid Nawaz: Stealth Jihadist Exposed

Gates of Vienna, by Baron Bodissey, Dec. 22, 2015:

Maajid Nawaz is a prominent “moderate” or secular Muslim and the founder of the Quilliam Foundation in Britain. His organization was featured briefly in this space two years ago, when Tommy Robinson and Kevin Carroll left the EDL and teamed up with Quilliam just before Tommy’s trial (see these three posts from October 2013 for more on Tommy Robinson and Quilliam).

The following exposé by Vikram Chatterjee examines the extensive use by Maajid Nawaz of untruths, dissimulation, evasions, and misleading statements in his writings about Islam. In these he reveals himself to be a practitioner of taqiyya, tawriya, and kitman, the time-honored Islamic doctrines of lying and sacred misdirection.

Update: Mr. Chatterjee has cross-posted this article to his own blog, where you will find his further thoughts on Maajid Nawaz.

maajidnawaz

Maajid Nawaz: Stealth Jihadist Exposed
by Vikram K. Chatterjee

Thanks in part to the help of Douglas Murray, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Sam Harris, Prime Minister David Cameron and others, Maajid Nawaz has acquired an undeserved reputation as a secular liberal. Despite his outward facade of secularism and liberalism, Nawaz is in fact a deeply devout Sunni Muslim supremacist, operating far behind enemy lines in the Dar al-Harb, the House of War. Nawaz, to fulfill his duties as a Muslim, is waging a campaign of stealth Jihad in order to further the cause of Islam by making himself appear friendly and open to the Infidels of the West while simultaneously carrying out a campaign of mass deception about Islam itself. His goal is to weaken any resistance to the conquest of the Infidel lands of the West by publicly spreading disinformation about the faith, about its many ways of conquest, and deceiving his audience about the doctrinal details of Islam itself. While this may seem like a preposterous claim to make, it merely reflects the ordinary reality of stealth Jihad.

In what follows, Nawaz’s campaign of deception will be demonstrated.

Maajid Nawaz’s not-so-subtle threats of decapitation

The first thing to be said is that Nawaz is easily shown to have deployed threatening, jihad-tinged language after he supposedly became a secular liberal. In July of 2012, Nawaz’s book Radical: My Journey Out of Islamist Extremism was published by WH Allen. The book purports to be a memoir in which Nawaz describes his youth in Essex, how he joined the Sunni supremacist group Hizb ut-Tahrir, and how he became a political prisoner in Egypt where he supposedly had a revelation in which he saw that “Islamism”, or variously “Islamist extremism” was a divisive political ideology, and decided to leave it (but not, crucially, Islam itself), becoming a secular liberal. Fifteen months later, in October 2013, a year and a half after the UK publication of Nawaz’ memoir, Tommy Robinson quit the English Defense League, the organization which he started, out of fear that its ranks were swelling with neo-Nazis. He embraced Maajid Nawaz and Quilliam Foundation instead, accepting at the time their claims of secularism to be genuine. In an email obtained by Huffington Post Assistant News Editor Jessica Elgot, Nawaz described this event as the “UK’s largest right-wing street movement — the EDL — is being decapitated.”[1] (emphasis added)

Interesting choice of words, no? Why would the “former Islamist extremist” Maajid Nawaz use such threatening, jihad-tinged language? Could his secular liberalism be a clever sham? As we shall see, turning to the book he co-authored with Sam Harris, the evidence shows Nawaz is cold and calculating in his bald-faced telling of untruths, repeatedly deploying outrageous falsehoods about Islam.

The lies of Maajid Nawaz in Islam and the Future of Tolerance: A Dialogue

Published in October 2015, Islam and the Future of Tolerance: A Dialogue purports to be a conversation between two liberals, one an acknowledged atheist and secularist, the other a supposedly nominal Muslim. The goal of the book seems to be to find a way of talking about Islam and its attendant problems in a polite way, and search for a path for a kind of Islamic secularism. Harris, apparently convinced of Nawaz’ liberalism and secularism, entered into the “dialogue” with him in October 2014. In an article entitled “Can Liberalism Be Saved From Itself”, Harris wrote what will prove to have been a fateful sentence:

Whatever the prospects are for moving Islam out of the Middle Ages, hope lies not with obscurantists like Reza Aslan but with reformers like Maajid Nawaz.[2]

Harris called Aslan an obscurantist, yet turning to his book with Nawaz, on page 44 we find Nawaz saying, of Sayyid Qutb, the notorious Muslim Brotherhood leader, theologian and author of Milestones, and In The Shade of the Qur’an, whose zealous career was a primary force in creating the modern Islamic movements to restore the Caliphate, that “the Egyptian regime killed him for writing a book”.

This is a straightforward falsehood. Notoriously, Qutb was executed by the Egyptian state for his alleged involvement in an attempt to assassinate Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser.[3] By saying that Qutb was executed for merely writing a book, Nawaz portrays Qutb as a devout Muslim as an innocent victim, a tried and true tactic of Islamic propaganda. It seems highly unlikely that Nawaz is unaware of the real reason for Qutb’s execution, given that Nawaz spent four years at the same prison in which Qutb was held, Mazra Tora.

Moving on, on page 61 of the book, Harris brings up the important point of Qur’anic literalism:

I want to ask you about this, because my understanding is that basically all “moderate” Muslims — that is, those who aren’t remotely like Islamists, or even especially conservative, in their social attitudes — are nevertheless fundamentalists by the Christian standard, because they believe the Qur’an to be the literal and inerrant word of God.

Excellent question, Sam. Do mainstream Muslims believe that the Qur’an is the literal and inerrant word of God? What is Nawaz’s reply?

Well, Nawaz’s three-page reply on pages 61-64 gives no answer whatsoever to this question. He avoids it entirely, beginning with the evasive phrase “I think we have to be careful to avoid two mistakes…” and so on. Nawaz then goes on a curious series of tangents, offering up entertaining thoughts about the meaning of the term literal, which is apparently a big mystery. He then turns down a series of historical side tracks about the Mu’tazilites, Iranian philosophy, and the Council of Nicaea before telling us, in answer to the question of whether the Qur’an was created by God that he “won’t take theological stances here”.

Having done all that, on page 64 Nawaz drops the arresting phrase “because there is no clergy in Islam”, apparently confident that Harris and the reader have never heard of the ulama. Nawaz finishes by stating that “My role is to probe and ask skeptical questions about interpretive methodology, Muslim history, identity, politics, policy, values, and morality”, a job description that apparently does not include answering straightforward questions like “Do Muslims believe that the Qur’an is the literal and inerrant word of God?” The reader ends up finding no definitive answer to this salient question, which is curious, since Nawaz is supposedly an honest secularist and liberal who should be eager to answer simple questions. That Harris cannot bring himself to press Nawaz on this important point, or catch Nawaz’s lie about there being “no clergy in Islam” demonstrates his inadequacy to the task at hand.

After a further set of comments from Harris about the nature of religious moderation and the different range of problems posed by literal readings of different religious traditions, Nawaz responds on page 69 with some apparently secular-minded comments about “sad and horrendous atrocities committed against hostages in Syria by British and European Muslim terrorists.” From the context, it appears that Nawaz is referring to Islamic State beheadings and immolations of captives, but without specific definitions of the terms used in the sentence: “hostage” and “British and European Muslim terrorists”, the statement could be read in other ways. He could just as easily be referring to bombing done by the British and French states in Syria, and using tawriya[4] to privately redefine what a “hostage” and a “European Muslim terrorist” is, so that he appears to be denouncing Islamic State atrocities, while in his own heart he actually isn’t. That may sound to some readers like a paranoid suspicion to have, but time and again we have seen Muslims appear make overtures of peace or condemnations of Muslim atrocities, employing vague language like “we condemn the killing of innocents” while not deigning to mention what is meant by the term “innocent”. Nawaz may well be up to similar shenanigans with this phrase.

On the next page, we find Nawaz saying, of Islamic reform, that “I think the challenge lies with interpretation…” In Islam, interpretation of scripture and tradition is dictated from the top down, beginning with the ulama, the clergy, who in turn are today mostly re-iterating interpretations (generally called tafsir — commentary or elucidation) that were arrived at by Muslim theologians about a thousand years ago. This class of Muslim clergy, the ulama, in turn runs the various schools where Islam is taught to Imams, qadis and the like, so that the teaching of the ulama spreads outward from the main centers of Islamic teaching, such as Al-Azhar University in Cairo, and the schools run by and for Shia clerics in Qom, Iran.

That Maajid is telling Harris that the path forward for Islamic reform is to have new ‘interpretation’ (tafsir) of scripture should be very troubling to Harris. This kind of interpretation in Islam is only permitted to the learned scholars of Islam. It is not a democratic notion, with everyday Muslims reading scripture for themselves. Rather, Nawaz’s stated position on Islamic reform is basically “let’s leave it to the ulama to give us new tafsirs. That will result in a reformed Islam.” This indicates that he is not willing to really break with orthodoxy in Islam, and make Islam open to lay Muslims to read for themselves, in their own languages, the way that William Tyndale, who was burned at the stake for daring to translate the Bible into English, insisted on for his fellow Christians.

This point of language is one that Harris appears not to understand, or doesn’t think worth discussing. Muslims don’t really read the Qur’an. Rather, they just recite it in a language they don’t understand. At no point in the book does Harris even ask Nawaz if he would encourage his fellow Muslims to read the Qur’an in a language they can actually understand, as the number of people who can actually read and understand the classical Arabic of the Qur’an is vanishingly small. Since Nawaz does not suggest this crucially important change himself, we can safely assume he does not want to break with orthodoxy and encourage Muslims to read the Qur’an in their own languages and thus be able to interpret it for themselves. From this we can see his true agenda: he wants to keep scripture, and the authority that goes with it, in the hands of the few. When it comes to interpreting the Qur’an, Nawaz is no democrat. He’s an authoritarian.

Read more 

Deception Cloaked in an American Flag

Ahmed-Getty-640x480Breitbart, by Brigitte Gabriel, Dec. 16, 2015:

You could feel the excitement in the air. To finally have a moderate Muslim leader, a woman to boot, wrapped in an American flag appearing on Fox News with Megan Kelly talking about her love for this country and what a loyal citizen she is.

This leader even started a Republican Muslim Coalition, a Republican Party’s answer to prayer, and even called Donald Trump to join her at any mosque of his choosing on a Friday afternoon to see for himself how patriotic the American Muslim community is.

Wow, finally what everyone has waited for is becoming reality…. Saba Ahmed has emerged to save the day.

But who is Saba Ahmed – really?

She is a former Democratic candidate for Congress who ran in 2012 on a platform that she would bring all U.S. soldiers home from the Middle East and Afghanistan, because in her view they do not need to be there.

She got less than a third of a percent of the vote and then switched to the Republican party, claiming it better represented her pro-life, pro-business, pro-traditional family values, and pro-defense, pro-trade, pro-business positions. If that is the case, it leads one to ask what she was doing with the Democrats in the first place.

Saba Ahmed, who claims to be such a patriotic American wrapped in our flag, would do well to explain why she was so chummy with Mohammed Mohamud, the Portland “Christmas Tree Bomber,” so much so that she showed up at his trial to support him and was thrown out of one of his court hearings for contempt.

Saba Ahmed’s true agenda can be found in past comments she made about Islamic terrorists’ “anti-Islamic actions” and then compared them to the Christian “terrorists” of the CIA and the American military who she says also have innocent blood on their hands.

Ahmed, who has a law degree and works for the U.S. Patent Office, apparently can’t distinguish between terrorism based on religious belief, as was the case with the San Bernardino terrorist attacks, and US government agencies and armed forces that have no religious affiliation. The fact that she can conflate the two, and somehow label our country’s efforts to defend itself “terrorist actions” worthy of comparison with Islamic radicals shows her real intent.

She once told Glenn Beck, Koran in hand, that her Islamic faith is all she has and refused to denounce the brutal, sexist aspects of Sharia law, saying all things are a mixture of good and bad. Party affiliation for Ahmed appears secondary to an Islamist, pro-Sharia, anti-U.S. agenda.

Despite her claims of being a Republican, she marched with Occupy Portland, which had a very strong anti-Israel platform. She spoke at one of their rallies and said that the Muslim world hates the US because of its policies and that it is the US that must change. She has been banned from the Oregon Tea Party and Washington County Republicans for false accusations and fabricating death threats she claimed came from Tea Party members, but which originated from her.

I had my own very highly visible confrontation with Ahmed in Washington DC last year. At a meeting at the Heritage Foundation discussing the Benghazi attacks she posed as an innocent student wanting to know why we were casting all Muslims in a negative light. None of us there had done any such thing or even brought up the discussion about Muslims and radicalism. My response to her was posted on YouTube and has gotten almost 14 million views.

What we have in Saba Ahmed is an example of the highest level of sophisticated deception by an Islamist trying to insert themselves into the national security discussion.

And she isn’t the first one…

It should be noted that figures such as Abdurahman M. Alamoudi and Anwar al-Awlakiinitially appeared on the American scene as “moderate Muslims” invited to speak at the White House and the Pentagon with friends on the highest levels – President Bush and President Clinton in the case of Alamoudi – before their terrorist ties were eventually revealed. Alamoudi is currently serving a 23 year prison sentence and Al-Awlaki is dead – assassinated by our own government.

The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) is another example of what appears to be a moderate Muslim group speaking on behalf of the Muslim Community despite the fact that a number of their leaders and members have been arrested, imprisoned, exiled and charged with terrorism related charges.

On the one hand CAIR said they were against all forms of unjustified violence, but refused to denounce Bin Laden by name. Once their real agenda was exposed on numerous occasions, it was always the same: US actions and policy in the Middle East triggered the 9/11 attacks. In order to prevent further attacks, their proposed solution was to remove US soldiers from the Middle East, cease US support of Israel, and allow the Palestinians free reign to destroy the Jewish homeland. In other words, we’re not really sorry about 9/11, Madrid, London, Paris x 2, Sydney, San Bernardino, and on and on. We’re not really sorry, because really, you brought this on yourselves.

Don’t be fooled, America. Thankfully, Donald Trump is much too clever to fall for Saba Ahmed’s facade and her manipulation. Hopefully, Fox News and those who give her a platform will wake up as well to her charade.

We must recognize figures like Saba Ahmed for what they are: Islamists who spout patriotic platitudes, but who justify acts of Islamic terrorism, and whose intent is nothing less than a worldwide caliphate that would undo America from within, with Sharia formally established as the standard for Muslims. With “friends” like this, who needs enemies?

Brigitte Gabriel is a terrorism analyst and a two times NYT bestselling author of Because They Hate and They Must Be Stopped: Why We Must Defeat Radical Islam and How We Can Do It.  She is the Founder and President of ACT! for America, www.actforamerica.org, the largest national security grassroots organization in the US dedicated to combating terrorism.