A Last, Desperate Plea to Excuse Hamas Support

hamas-pleaIPT NewsJanuary 12, 2017:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Jihadi Shadow Government in America

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

“Phase Two:  Phase of gradual appearance on the public scene…infiltrating various sectors of the Government…Establishing a shadow government (secret) within the Government.”

The Islamic Movement’s World Underground Movement Plan (view full document HERE)

The purpose of the Islamic Movement’s establishment of a “shadow government” inside the U.S. government is two-fold:  first, to influence decision-making as it relates to Islam and the “war on terror”; and secondly, to gather intelligence.

A declassified FBI confidential informant (CI) report dated 8/17/1988, details the Muslim Brotherhood’s activities in the United States  at the time and states:  “(CI) has advised that the Ikhwan is a secret Muslim organization that has unlimited funds and is extremely well organized in the United States to the point where it has set up political action front groups with no traceable ties to the IIIT or its various Muslim groups. They also have claimed success in infiltrating the United States government…the IIIT leadership has indicated that in this phase their organization needs to peacefully get inside the United States Government and also American universities.  (CI) noted that the ultimate goal of the Islamic Revolution is the overthrow of all non-Islamic governments.”

clinton-with-awan

It was reported last week that three Muslim brothers – Abid, Imran, and Jamal Awan – who have been working IT on Capitol Hill, were fired in the last 10 days because they allegedly accessed computer systems of Members of Congress without authorization.  Another brother and a sister in the Awan family are also apparently under investigation in this same case.

An FBI press release dated 11/13/2007 reveals:  Nada Nadim Prouty, a 37-year-old Lebanese national and resident of Vienna, VA, pleaded guilty today in the Eastern District of Michigan to charges of fraudulently obtaining U.S. citizenship, which she later used to gain employment at the FBI and CIA; accessing a federal computer system to unlawfully query information about her relatives and the terrorist organization Hizballah; and conspiracy to defraud the United States.”  To be clear, Prouty was an active CIA case officer and former FBI Special Agent whose immediate family were personally close to senior Hizbollah leaders.

nada-prouty

In April 2008, a Muslim police officer, Sergeant Weiss Rasool with the Fairfax County (VA) Police Department, was sentenced in federal court for illegally using the FBI’s National Crime Information Center database to see if he and others with whom he was acquainted were on the Terrorist Offender list.  He also discovered one of his friends was under FBI investigation in a terrorism matter and tipped him off prior to the FBI raid.

While working undercover as an intern at the headquarters office for Hamas (doing business as the Council on American Islamic Relations – CAIR) in Washington, D.C., UTT’s own Chris Gaubatz unearthed a memo revealing the Hamas entity was working to influence “judiciary, intelligence, and homeland security committees” (Council on American-Islamic Relations 2007-2008 Strategic Plan).

Following these revelations, in October 2009, Congresswoman Sue Myrick (NC) called for investigations into the Hamas (CAIR) plan to put Muslims inside committees and on staffs to influence and gather intelligence.  Democrats came to the defense of Hamas/CAIR (Conyers, Honda, Velazquez, Lee).

In 2012, Congresswoman Michele Bachmann and others called for U.S. government Inspectors General to investigate the penetration of the Muslim Brotherhood inside the U.S. government.  Republican leaders came to the Muslim Brotherhood’s defense (McCain, Rubio, Boehner).

None of this should be shocking to us.  In the Tafsir – the authoritative book of Islamic law which legally defines every verse in the Koran – Koranic verse 9:5 (“Fight and slay the unbelievers wherever you find them…”) is legally defined as follows:

“…besiege them, and lie in wait for them in each and every ambush, do not wait until you find them. Rather, seek and besiege them in their areas and forts, gather intelligence about them in the various roads and fairways so that what is made wide looks ever smaller to them.  This way, they will have no choice, but to die or embrace Islam.”  (Tafsir, Ibn Kathir)

Suit-wearing jihadis portray themselves as friends wanting to be helpful.  The facts reveal a very different picture.  There is an ongoing effort to penetrate the U.S. government by the Islamic Movement, and there is evidence readily available this effort has been very successful to date.  Efforts by those wanting to protect and defend the Republic are repudiated for doing so by people who should be batting for the home team. The influence operations and intelligence gathering by our enemy is effective.

To rip our enemies out of the many places they have lodged themselves in the government system will be a significant endeavor.  Americans must brace themselves as these efforts begin, because the hard-left marxists and jihadist will portray themselves as victims and our the leaders of the new administration as the “bad guys.”  There will much wailing and nashing of teeth worthy of Academy awards.

We are at war, but a large part of the war will not be fought on the battlefield with tanks, artillery and infantry.  It will be fought in the media, on Capitol Hill, and in town halls across this nation.  Citizens must know and understand the threat if we are to be victorious.

Jihadist Groups in the US: What Next?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

According to a July 2008 Justice Department court filing:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

***

 

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

AP

AP

Breitbart, by John Hayward, February 1, 2017:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Muslim Brotherhood Front Organizations, U.S. and Canada

Gatestone Institute, by Thomas Quiggin, January 31, 2017:

  • The 2008 Holy Land Relief terrorism funding criminal trial resulted in multiple convictions and was touted as the one of the largest terrorism financing trials in American history. Expectations were high that the 2008 trial would be followed by further trials involving the listed unindicted co-conspirators such as CAIR USA and the Islamic Society of North America.
  • However, with the appointment of Eric Holder as the U.S. Attorney General in 2009, all further actions on this file appear to have been frozen. Holder would later speak at a conference supporting one of the unindicted co-conspirators.
  • It is not clear if the ongoing criminal investigation focuses only on those individuals leading IRFAN at the time of its delisting as a charity and listing as a terrorism entity, or if the investigation also includes those who helped found IRFAN. This may be an important distinction, as the Canada Revenue Agency stated that IRFAN was deliberately created and designed to circumvent Canadian terrorism-funding rules.
  • It appears possible that the Trump Administration will crack down on Islamist extremist groups in the USA. This would likely have a spill-over effect into Canada and Europe, though greater attention to border security and issues of funding terrorism.

U.S. Senator Ted Cruz last week submitted legislation to designated the Muslim Brotherhood as a Terrorist Organization.

Cruz (R-TX) earlier had a bill in the Senate which would not only ban the Muslim Brotherhood in the U.S. but also three of its front groups: Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR) USA, Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT). These American-based front groups have corresponding chapters or organizations in Canada as well.

Muslim Brotherhood front organizations and their members have an ongoing problem with criminal activity, terrorism-funding activities and overall negative relations with legal authorities. These problems range from being listed as terrorist groups, being charged for weapons possession and an even an arrest for alleged sexual charges involving a 12-year-old girl. Several of the charges are consistent with the extremist nature of the Muslim Brotherhood itself, given its commitment to violent political change. Both criminal investigations and terrorism listings in North America, for instance, have been directly related to terrorism funding for Hamas, itself a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood.

The emblem of the Muslim Brotherhood, and its founder, Hassan al-Banna.

The future is also uncertain for a variety of groups and individuals related to the criminal trials surrounding the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, formerly known as the Occupied Land Fund. The 2008 criminal trial resulted in multiple convictions and was touted as the one of the largest terrorism financing trials in American history. Expectations were high that the 2008 trial would be followed by further trials involving the listed unindicted co-conspirators such as CAIR USA and the Islamic Society of North America. However, with the appointment of Eric Holder as the Attorney General of the United States in 2009, all further actions on this file appear to have been frozen. Holder would later speak at a conference supporting one of the unindicted co-conspirators. It is not yet clear if the next U.S. Attorney General will direct that the files be re-activated.

CAIR USA has been repeatedly identified as a Muslim Brotherhood front organization. It was listed as a Muslim Brotherhood front organization and as a terrorism entity by the United Arab Emirates in 2014. CAIR USA employees and former employees have a rather dubious history of criminal activity. Among those CAIR USA employees charged with criminal offences or deported have been Randall Ismail Royer (weapons and explosive charges), Bassam Khafagi (bank and visa fraud), Ghassan Elashi (terrorism financing of Hamas), and Nabil Sadoun (deported for ties to terrorist groups). Other members and fund-raisers for CAIR USA have also been charged.

In Canada, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police investigation (Project Sapphire) into the International Relief Fund for the Afflicted and Needy (IRFAN) continues. IRFAN was one of four Muslim Brotherhood front groups identified during testimony to the Canadian Senate in 2015. The others were Islamic Relief Canada, the Muslim Association of Canada and the National Council of Canadian Muslims, formerly known as CAIR CAN. CAIR CAN, according to the U.S. State Department and a multiplicity of other sources, is the Canadian chapter of CAIR USA.

IRFAN had its charitable status revoked for funding terrorism in 2011 and was subsequently listed as a terrorism entity by the Government of Canada in 2014. It is not clear if the ongoing criminal investigation focuses only on those individuals leading IRFAN at the time of its delisting as a charity and listing as a terrorism entity, or if the investigation also includes those who helped found IRFAN. This may be an important distinction, as the Canada Revenue Agency stated that IRFAN was deliberately created and designed to circumvent Canadian terrorism-funding rules.

Another of the four front groups, the Muslim Association of Canada (MAC), also made the news in 2015. At that point, it was alleged that IRFAN continued to received funding from the Muslim Association of Canada even after IRFAN had its charitable status revoked for funding terrorism in 2011. This information came from an RCMP search warrant that was used to raid IRFAN premises in Mississauga and Montreal. In addition to funding issues, the MAC and IRFAN are connected to each other through common board members and their association to Hamas. IRFAN was funding Hamas and the MAC is one of only two organizations outside of Egypt that openly states it is a Muslim Brotherhood adherent group.

The Islamic Society of North America (Canadian Chapter) has also had its problems. Along with a variety of internal fraud issues, the ISNA Development Fund had the charitable status of its “Development Fund” revoked for terrorism funding. The terrorism-funding money in question was sent to the Relief Organization for Kashmiri Muslims (ROKM) with the ultimate aim of supporting Jamaat-e-Islami, widely known as the Muslim Brotherhood’s sister group in south Asia.

The Muslim Student Association

Another group, the Muslim Student Association (MSA) of the United States and Canada was established in January 1963 by members of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign campus. Its creation was the result of Saudi-backed efforts to create a network of international Islamic organizations in order to spread its Wahhabist ideology. It was essentially “an arm of the Saudi-funded, Muslim Brotherhood-controlled Muslim World League.”

The following individuals have all been identified as members of the MSA at a variety universities in Canada. They have all been either charged with terrorism offences or died as suicide bombers at the behest of ISIS:

  • Ahmed Sayed Khadr from the University of Ottawa. Khadr was killed on October 2, 2003, along with al-Qaeda and Taliban members, in a shootout by Pakistani security forces near the Afghanistan border. An al-Qaeda website profiling “120 Martyrs of Afghanistan” described him as a leader in Bin Laden’s organization and praised him for “tossing his little child [Omar] in the furnace of the battle.”
  • Chiheb Esseghaier was convicted in 2015 for his role in the attempted bombing of a cross-border VIA Rail train.
  • Khadar Khalib has been charged with terrorism-related offenses and is believed to have killed in Syria while fighting for ISIS.
  • Awso Peshdary, born in Ottawa, was arrested in February 2015 as part of operation “Project Servant” by the RCMP Integrated National Security Enforcement Team. He was charged with participation in the activity of a terrorist group.
  • John “Yahya” Maguire was also born in the Ottawa area, but went off to Syria and become infamous for his ISIS recruiting video. He has also been charged with terrorism offences in absentia.
  • Youssef Sakhir, Samir Halilovic and Zakria Habibi are/were from Sherbrooke Quebec, but are now listed as missing and believed to be fighting in Syria.
  • Muhannad al-Farekh, Farid Imam and Maiwand Yar have all had charges laid against them for terrorism-related offences. Their whereabouts are unknown, but they may be in Pakistan.
  • Calgary suicide bomber Salma Ashrafi was the President of his Muslim Student Association before dying in a suicide bombing in Iraq.

Chiheb Battikh and the Muslim Association of Canada

In December 2012, Chiheb Battikh of Montreal attempted to kidnap the son of a billionaire and hold him for ransom. The Tunisian-Canadian was identified by the Tunis Tribune as being “close to Ennahda” or the Muslim Brotherhood. The French language Journal de Montréal did a five-page story on him following his conviction. Among the issues raised by the paper was Battikh’s long time position on the board of directors for the Muslim Association of Canada as well as his position as the director of education for them. The issue of whether the kidnapping was intended to help fund the new Canadian Institute of Islamic Civilization was raised as well. Battikh had been in charge of that fundraising effort and the project had been in trouble.

The Trump Administration

Some of President-elect Donald J. Trump’s advisors have strong views on the Muslim Brotherhood. Included among these are Walid Phares, who favors banning the Muslim Brotherhood in the U.S. Other advisors include Frank Gaffney, and Pieter “Pete” Hoekstra, both of whom are well acquainted with Muslim Brotherhood activities

Outlook

A variety of Muslim Brotherhood front groups have drawn attention to themselves through terrorism funding and other forms of alleged criminal behavior. CAIR USA (and others) have also been involved in lawfare — suing critics to silence them. Altogether, this activity and their own allegedly criminal actions have drawn greater attention to them and increased, rather than decreased, the amount of research done on them. With the rising, often Islamist-inspired, violence in Europe, the Middle East and South East Asia, more attention will be drawn to the sources of the extremism that are producing and funding terrorism.

It appears possible that a Trump Administration will crack down on Islamist extremist groups in the USA. It also appears probable that this will have a spill-over effect into Canada and Europe though greater attention to border security and issues of funding terrorism. These groups, which have already drawn attention to themselves, may start feeling the heat sooner rather than later.

Also see:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Muslim Brotherhood Ally Falsely Smears Senator to Block Terror Designation Bill

  (CQ Roll Call via AP Images)


(CQ Roll Call via AP Images)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CAIR: Cruz’s Muslim Brotherhood Bill Not About Terrorism

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

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

IPT, by John Rossomando  •  Jan 26, 2017

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Awad cast the orders as anti-Muslim and bigoted.

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

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

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

cair-terrorists-uae-ip

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

CounterJihad, by Paul Sperry, January 20, 2017:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The government agrees.

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

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

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

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

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

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

cairhamas2by Steven Emerson
IPT News
January 19, 2017

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CAIR officials often side with Hamas and other Palestinian terrorists.

Read more

Because Nothing Says ‘I CAIR’ Like a Pardon

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

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

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

Isn’t that rich?

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

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

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

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

As I explained at the time, zakat is often misleadingly translated as “charitable giving” by commentators and government officials. Actually, it is the fortification of the ummah (the notional worldwide Muslim community). Under classic sharia, zakat may only be contributed to Muslims. There are eight categories of permissible zakat recipients; one is Muslims who are fighting in jihad operations. (See the ancient sharia manual Reliance of the Traveller, sec. h8.17: “Zakat: The seventh category is those fighting for Allah, meaning people engaged in Islamic military operations for whom no salary has been allotted in the army roster[.]”)

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

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

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

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

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

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

Also see:

A Last, Desperate Plea to Excuse Hamas Support

cair-plea

IPT News
January 12, 2017

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Trump has Islamic clerics wetting their pants

fatwa-amjaWND, by Leo Hohmann, January 9, 2017:

North American Islamic scholars have issued a legal ruling or “fatwa” in the wake of Donald Trump’s stunning victory and imminent presidency, instructing the faithful on what to expect and how they should respond to shifting political realities.

Changes are coming, warns the Assembly of Muslim Jurist of America, and Muslims are told to get ready. The fatwa is titled “AMJA Post-Election Statement: Principles and Roadmap.”

While the fatwa received no media attention, this declaration contains the principles to which imams in the nation’s more than 3,100 mosques will be looking for guidance on how to instruct their congregations.

Philip Haney, a retired Homeland Security officer and co-author of the whistleblower book “See Something Say Nothing,” said the document is loaded with coded language that signals a possible uptick in jihadist attacks during Trump’s presidency.

The fatwa starts out by referring to a “political storm” that has “taken over this country.”

The Islamic scholars at AMJA go on to explain that “Muslims of America are neither guests nor strangers” and they will strengthen their bonds with the country’s civil rights organizations and work to defend Muslim rights “whenever needed.”

“However, at the same time, we must always fulfill our obligations completely and be active participants in society working to protect the security and well-being of its inhabitants,” the fatwa states.

And what are their “obligations?”

“Their obligations are set by Shariah law,” Haney said.

The AMJA never had to issue such a declaration under President Obama because he gave the Muslim community everything they wanted, Haney said.  Now, they are expecting to meet resistance and they are preparing the troops.

“This whole fatwa is about fitnah,” Haney said.

“Fitnah” is an Arabic word meaning “trial” or “test,” which can take the form of oppression against Muslims in a society dominated by infidels. In the modern sense, “fitnah” equals “Islamophobia.”

“And the whole fitnah they expect to encounter is the new administration of Donald Trump,” Haney said. “That is what this whole fatwa is about, that the American Muslim community is about to encounter an intensification of what they consider Islamophobia.”

The AMJA’s Fatwa Committee is led by its senior member, the Egyptian-born radical Waleed Idris al-Maneese, imam of al-Faroq mosque in Bloomington, Minnesota, which has been attended by at least five Somali refugees who ended up being terrorists, as previously reported by WND.

The fatwa committee never mentions Trump by name, but it’s clear who they are talking about. They quote the Quran to reiterate that they themselves are the proper authorities to which all American Muslims should look for guidance in the coming days of trial.

“They’re laying the groundwork on the response to this fitnah,” says Haney. And what is the response?

While they don’t come right out and say it, the language of the directive will be understood by Muslims to mean that violent jihad could be within the realm of what is expected of them in the fight against the Trump-led fitnah or “oppression,” Haney said.

The threat is made with the following statement:

“There is no blame upon a country if it does what is needed to protect its interests and security as long as it does not transgress or oppress by denying or violating rights.”

Of course under Islamic law, where Muslims are able to rule, the government tramples all over people’s “rights,” especially those of Christians, Jews and other religious minorities. But in a Western democracy where Muslims are the minority, it helps further the cause of Islam to play the victim and claim to be “oppressed.”

“Osama Bin Laden was always talking about oppression,” Haney said. “These are capital offenses in Islam,” he added, as long as it is non-Muslims who are doing the oppressing. Otherwise it is expected that Muslims should oppress and subjugate non-Muslims where Muslims have the upper hand in a Muslim-majority society.

The fatwa continues by stating that Islam, with respect to its beliefs and legal foundations, is “unalterably fixed. It does not accept any replacement for change.”

That’s a warning to any moderates within the Islamic community, that they have no standing to make any claims on behalf of Islam, Haney said.

“What about all this talk about moderate Muslims? This is AMJA telling you there is no conceivable flexibility in Islam, it’s fixed, it will not change,” he said. “This ruling or fatwa is to accommodate anybody through any time or place, that’s why AMJA exists, to help Muslims in this non-Muslim community navigate the challenges of fitnah under Donald Trump.”

The fatwa states that only the AMJA can be trusted to represent the face of Islam in America:

“One must refer to the people of knowledge to know that the principle is being applied properly. A Muslim must comply with his faith and refer confusing or troublesome matters to the well-grounded scholars. AMJA is of the view that there has yet to occur – and they do not expect to occur – a situation in which one is required to flee with one’s faith or wherein one is excused from performing some parts of the faith’s teachings.”

“They’re telling the people you have to comply with the parameters of Shariah law,” Haney explains. “They’re telling Muslims, ‘we’re about to go down into a danger zone, so don’t go off on your own, you must listen to the enlightened ones.’

“They’re saying we’re not at that point yet where you need to flee. They’re telling you you’re not excused from observing Shariah law and we are telling you now you are obligated to keep it. You will flee America before you compromise with Shariah law. ”

The fatwa exhorts Muslims to “reach out to the other ethnic and religious group as well as political movements on the left and right. This will be the only way to stop those who deal in hate.”

The fatwa authors then re-emphasizing that Muslims must double down and support civil rights organizations, which signals that the Muslim community plans to step up its filing of lawsuits against governments and businesses that do not continue the Obama-era policies of affording special rights and privileges to Muslims and mosques that practice Shariah.

Without naming them, the call for donations is clearly directed at lining the coffers of the Council on American-Islamic Relations or CAIR, which is an offshoot of the extremist Muslim Brotherhood, identified as a co-conspirator in funding Hamas terrorists in the Holy Land Foundation trial of 2007.

The fatwa states:

“From among the most important obligations during this stage is to support those institutions and organizations that serve the Muslim community, such as those interested in defending freedoms, civil rights and political activism, those dedicated to social services and relief, and those dedicated to dawah, religious instruction and providing religious rulings.

“It is most unbelievable that there are some who cry over the state of the community and then they are too stingy to donate their time or money to such organizations. Worse than that are those who are even too stingy to pray for them or give them a kind word. But the worst of all are those who seek to destroy such organizations.”

‘Prepare for any possibility’

Haney said this is perhaps the most revealing segment of the fatwa.

“They’re telling you the whole structure of the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States right there, and when you see it it’s as clear as day,” he said. “And they’re saying it is your obligation to support them.”

They see oncoming time of trial or Islamophobia as a test but that doesn’t alleviate the consequences for those people who are causing the difficulties for Muslims.

“That last line, where it says, ‘But the worst of all are those who seek to destroy such organizations’ is very revealing,” Haney said. “That is directed at those who go around trying to get CAIR out of our police departments, out of the FBI and out of our military. This could include Congress itself if they designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization. This is the worst kind of fitnah, and what is the fate of those people? Jihad.”

The last admonition in the fatwa is perhaps the most chilling.

“No one knows the unseen except Allah. It is possible that an individual hates something while Allah has placed a lot of good for him in it. We must prepare for any possibility while hoping for the best outcomes.”

This comes directly from the Quran.

“The thing you hate you may have to do,” Haney says. “Devout Muslims know when they hear that phrase what it means. So it’s written in shorthand for those who know what it means.”

Flurry of lawsuits, activism on the way

So Haney, the career DHS officer who developed a database that could predict jihad attacks only to see it deleted from the DHS system by the Obama administration, expects to see an uptick not only in terrorist activity under the Trump administration. He believes America Muslims are also going to become more Shariah compliant.

“And that will spill over into the courts,” he said. “We will see more lawsuits filed, more allegations of hate crimes, hijab ripping, mosque defiling, and all those other things they consistently harp on are going to go up, because they see them as catalysts that reinforce this fatwa. They are going to be hyper-sensitive as a community to any perceived offense, because they are going into this new administration with the expectation that Trump is going to be oppressive, that they’re going to suffer, in other words an increase in Islamophobia, which is all fitnah is.

“So you’re going to hear the drumbeat of islamophobia louder and louder and it’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. Because if Trump actually does designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terror organization, then AMJA is going to be one too, because they are a front for the Brotherhood that provides the guidance.”

“It will edge them closer to violence because they’re told they must comply with the principles of Shariah and fitnah, and when you’re presented with the fitnah you must fight against it,” he said.

Haney believes the AMJA fatwa should be studied by the Trump administration as he believes it telegraphs the Muslim leaders’ plan to “set the stage” for a new level of activism and violence.

The AMJA is not just an American organization. It’s a part of the global Islamic hierarchy.

“They come to these fatwa decisions after consulting with their brethren around the world. This is not an independent organization,” he said. “It’s a global consortium that speaks in a unified voice, and they wrote this fatwa specifically about their expectation of fitnah with the election, but did it in consultation with the global community of Islamic scholars.”

“It is a declaration,” he added. “They are telling the community how to respond to the new administration, and what they should do. This is a paramilitary declaration, a clarion call to the minutemen, ‘the British are coming, the British are coming’ and they are expecting an open confrontation and telling them in advance that those trying to shut these organizations [like CAIR] down are the worst.”

Also see:

‘Clock Boy’ Loses in Court, Father’s Defamation Lawsuit Dismissed

Ahmed Mohamed, center, and father Mohamed Elhassan Mohamed, left, look on as their lawyer Susan E. Hutchison speaks holding the school pencil box holding the clock Ahmed built. (AP Photo/LM Otero)

Ahmed Mohamed, center, and father Mohamed Elhassan Mohamed, left, look on as their lawyer Susan E. Hutchison speaks holding the school pencil box holding the clock Ahmed built. (AP Photo/LM Otero)

PJ Media, by Debra Heine, January 11, 2017:

A district court judge in Texas has dismissed a defamation lawsuit filed by Ahmed Mohamed on his own behalf and on behalf of his 15-year-old son, Ahmed Mohamed. They had sued Fox News, Glenn Beck, and the mayor of Irving — among others — for defamation in September of 2016.

A year earlier, Ahmed, then a 14-year-old freshman at an Irving, Texas, high school, was arrested, briefly detained by police, and suspended for three days after bringing to school a “cool clock” that looked like a briefcase bomb. Ahmed claimed to have “invented” the easily assembled clock, and that he had brought it to school to show it to his shop teacher.

The incident led many to question the Mohamed family’s motives. Newly appointed District Court Judge Maricela Moore dismissed the lawsuit following a nearly three-hour hearing on Monday, according to the American Freedom Law Center:

The motion to dismiss was filed by lawyers from the American Freedom Law Center (“AFLC”) and local counsel Pete Rowe on behalf of the Center for Security Policy (“CSP”) and Jim Hanson, two of the defendants in the defamation case, which also named as defendants the local Fox affiliate, Glenn Beck, and Beck’s production company.

Mohamed had sued Hanson and CSP for statements Hanson had made on Beck’s program about the connection between the Clock Boy hoax bomb affair, the attendant media frenzy created in large part by his father Mohamed, civilization jihad, and the Counsel on American-Islamic Relations (“CAIR”), the Muslim Brotherhood-Hamas front group in the United States that promotes civilization jihad.

During the hearing, AFLC co-founder and senior counsel David Yerushalmi explained to Judge Moore that the purpose of the lawfare-driven lawsuit was to intimidate into silence those who might comment publicly on the connection between jihad, terrorism, sharia, and Islam. As such, Yerushalmi argued, “this case is a classic Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation or ‘SLAPP’ case and should be dismissed.”

During the lengthy hearing, Judge Moore pressed Mohamed’s lawyer, Fort Worth attorney Susan Hutchison, to provide any facts that would suggest that Hanson and the other defendants had said anything false or defamatory about Mohamed or his son during the television broadcasts. After spending a painfully embarrassing 15 minutes flipping through reams of paper, Mohamed’s lawyer was unable to provide any such evidence.

At the conclusion of the hearing, Judge Moore said that she would rule by the end of the day. On Tuesday, the court published Judge Moore’s ruling dismissing the lawsuit against Hanson and CSP with prejudice.

Upon leaving the courtroom, Yerushalmi made the following statement:

“This lawsuit filed by Clock Boy’s father is yet another example of Islamist lawfare, which is a component of the Muslim Brotherhood’s civilization jihad.”

Yerushalmi further explained that the purpose of such lawsuits, formally labelled Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (“SLAPP”), is to intimidate into silence those who might comment publicly on the connection between jihad, terrorism, sharia, and Islam.

Yerushalmi added:

The Islamists employ the progressive mainstream media to label any public criticism of a sharia-centric, jihad-driven Islam as “Islamophobic,” and they add fear and financial ruin to the equation by utilizing the legal system to file SLAPP actions.

Now that the lawsuit has been dismissed, the AFLC is petitioning the court for lawyer fees and sanctions against Clock Boy’s dad.

***

U.S. Islamist Group: Fake Friendship with Non-Believers

Sheikh Waleed Basyouni is a member of the North American Imam Federation (NAIF), Assembly of Muslim Jurists in America (AMJA)-Fatwa and Research Committee and the Director of Texas Dawah Convention. He is pictured here giving a speech titled "Reclaiming Islam from the Extremists."

Sheikh Waleed Basyouni is a member of the North American Imam Federation (NAIF), Assembly of Muslim Jurists in America (AMJA)-Fatwa and Research Committee and the Director of Texas Dawah Convention. He is pictured here giving a speech titled “Reclaiming Islam from the Extremists.”

Clarion Project, by Ryan Mauro, January 2, 2017:

The Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America, an influential group that issues fatwas (Islamic religious declarations), teaches Muslims that they “are allowed to show friendship to the disbelievers outwardly but never inwardly.”

The 2009 fatwa , which was originally brought to our attention by John Rossomando of the Investigative Project on Terrorism, cites Islamic scripture in its directive that Muslims must not befriend a non-believer over a Muslim except as a form of deception in response to a possible danger.

See the fatwa below:

amja-fatwa-taqiya-inside

AMJA has a history of extremist fatwas and sermons, including teaching that Hamas is not a terrorist group and ruling out offensive jihad against the U.S. only as a matter of pragmatism. You can read more about their background here.

Because AMJA doesn’t get in front of the cameras or maintain a high profile, it is often overlooked as part of the Islamist network in the U.S., but its influence should be taken seriously. In 2014, it trained 200 imams at its conference in Texas. Last year’s imams’ conference was in Chicago, as will 2017’s.

Its leadership council also spearheads Islamic online universities in the U.S. Its fatwa committee includes clerics with positions in Washington, D.C., Michigan, Minnesota and Texas.

AMJA’s list of “our experts” and list of members includes Islamist clerics from across the country, including top leaders from the Islamic Society of North America, the Islamic Circle of North America, Al-Maghrib Institute, the North American Imams Federation, the Muslim Association of Virginia and various mosques. The lists also include many international clerics, even though AMJA presents itself as an American organization.

The group’s influence can be seen behind efforts undertaken by the more publicity-hungry Islamist groups like the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a group that the Justice Department identified as a Muslim Brotherhood front that deceptively casts itself as a “moderate” civil rights group.

When I was booked to give educational counter-terrorism training to law enforcement in California, the San Diego chapter of CAIR responded aggressively, going so far as to compare my training of law enforcement officials to having the leader of the KKK teach police about black people. The CAIR official leading the charge had only months earlier traveled all the way to Chicago to attend AMJA’s imams’conference.

AMJA can serve as a window into the Islamist strategy. The extremism of AMJA is so clear that it cannot effectively operate in the limelight, so it stays away. Instead, the so-called “moderates” that serve as experts go in front of the cameras to wage their jihad against Islamism’s enemies.

When they speak, the official titles they have with their primary “moderate” organizations are used. But they are part of AMJA’s network even though few know it and the affiliation won’t show up in a byline in an article or interview. All it takes is using a different title and the AMJA member is never held accountable for the group’s radical fatwas.

However, these people must be held accountable. No genuine Muslim reformer will join AMJA. If a cleric involved with AMJA is positioning himself as an unobjectionable moderate to unbelievers, he is following his group’s radical fatwa.