CAIR’s Jihad against Mitt Romney

By Jarrad Winter:

The Council of American-Islamic Relations published a press release yesterday entitled CAIR Asks Romney to Explain Meeting with Infamous Islamophobe. CAIR press releases typically serve as an official announcement of their intent to initiate a Jihad. This particular Jihad targets Mitt Romney for meeting with “Islamophobe”  Lt. Gen. (Ret) Jerry Boykin .
I’ve witnessed CAIR wage Jihad many times. The progression of political pressure usually goes something similar to the following. CAIR issues a press release laying out their manufactured grievance. Within a day or two of the press release, a video complaining about “bigotry” and “Islamophobia” is uploaded to CAIR’s YouTube channel. From there, leftist sites like HuffPo and Salon jump into the mix (if they hadn’t jumped in earlier) and get behind the Islamists. After the Islamo-propaganda begins to have the desired effect, CAIR will often call a press conference in hopes of drawing a crowd to report on their contrived complaints. In addition to these so-called press conferences, CAIR representatives are frequently interviewed about their gripes by the Iranian network PressTV and regularly offered time to spew their lies on American TV networks. Typically, the net result is enough political pressure to force a response from the target of their Jihad. Usually, the response is an apology, some butt kissing, and a promise of future appeasement.
Like so many others, I have been nothing short of horrified by how inept the Romney campaign is at handling attacks. I am quite concerned the campaign is going to botch the hell out of this one. So, if anyone reading this happens to have connections to the Romney campaign, please relay the following strategic advice.
Advice for Romney
The worst thing Romney could possibly do is to fall into the trap of accidently validating the false premise of “Islamophobia”. If he validates the pretend hate crime, he will be screwed.

In addition to paying close attention to not mistakenly validate the Islamophobia straw man, Romney shouldn’t answer any questions or accusations from Islamists. Even just starting down the road of defending himself could allow CAIR to ruin him. Instead of being on the defensive, he needs to immediately go on the offensive and thrash CAIR for things such as

What Romney really needs to understand is the last thing CAIR wants is for him to scream bloody Jihad and make a scene all over national media about their direct connections to global Jihad–so that’s exactly what he should do.


—– [CAIR Press Release]

Muslim rights group questions why candidate willing to hold private meeting with anti-Muslim extremist  

WASHINGTON, Aug. 9, 2012 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) today called on presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney to clarify his decision to meet privately with a key figure in the Islamophobia movement, retired Lieutenant General William G. “Jerry” Boykin.  

SEE: Romney Met with Anti-Muslim Activist, Backers of Bachmann Witch Hunt Jerry Boykin: Romney’s Anti-Muslim General (Salon) Romney Held Private Denver Meeting with Dobson, Bauer (Politico)

 Boykin asserts that “[Islam] should not be protected under the First Amendment,” that there should be “no mosques in America” and that there can be no interfaith dialogue or cooperation between Muslims and Christians. In 2003, President Bush rebuked Boykin for his anti-Muslim stance.  

Earlier this year, Boykin’s extreme viewpoints resulted in him withdrawing from a prayer breakfast at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. CAIR and, a coalition of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans, had both asked the academy to retract the invitation because of Boykin’s Islamophobic views.  

CAIR: Islam Critic Backs Out of West Point Cadet Event (AP) Islamophobic General has Withdrawn from Prayer Breakfast

 “Romney would rightfully never meet with an anti-Semite or white supremacist, so why would he meet with an infamous Islamophobe?” said CAIR National Legislative Director Corey Saylor.

Saylor added that Boykin’s extremist views are well-documented and called on the Romney campaign to explain either why Boykin was not vetted or why a decision was made to have the candidate meet with a key figure in the domestic Islamophobia movement.

CAIR has been challenging Boykin’s un-American bigotry for a number of years.

CAIR and People For the American Way objected to a speech Boykin gave to a mayor’s prayer breakfast in Maryland. Hundreds of people contacted city officials to protest Boykin’s appearance.  

CAIR: An Army Officer, Years On, Still a Lightning Rod (Wash. Post) Editorial: Religious Bigotry in Ocean City? (Baltimore Sun)

 CAIR last year asked Romney to drop Walid Phares, a newly-appointed advisor on Middle East affairs, because he is a “former official” of a group implicated in the 1982 massacre of civilian men, women and children at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Lebanon.

 SEE: CAIR Letter to Romney About Walid Phares

Spiking the Examiner

By Diana West

News flash: The Washingon Examiner spiked my syndicated column on the Muslim Brotherhood and why five House Republicans — Reps. Michele Bachmann, Trent Franks, Louie Gohmert, Tom Rooney and Lynn Westermoreland — were correct to call on Inspectors General to investigate MB influence on US government policy-making. And therein lies a tale.

If the newspaper’s online search function is accurate, it is even more perplexing to note that the Examiner hasn’t run a single news story on the media-politics feeding frenzy, led by Sen. John McCain, directed at Rep. Michele Bachmann for raising questions about strong indications of Muslim Brotherhood penetration of the Washington policy-making chain. The geyser of Left-cum-GOP-Establishment hysteria arose from Bachmann et al pointing out in a letter to the State Department IG that Huma Abedin, a top advisor of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, has close family members involved in MB-associated groups and movements, which are dedicated to the destruction of the West. Indeed, it was on the mention of Huma Abedin that the Examiner told me the paper turned down my column (full column reprinted below).

A little backstory.

I have noted before with dismay that the Washington Examiner automatically spikes any syndicated column I write regarding what might be referred to as President Obama’s identity issues.

These include: the debate over the constitutional requirement that the president and vice president be “natural born”; this same debate as it enters court in eligibility challenges litigated from New Jersey to Georgia to the US Supreme Court; and related pieces of “natural born” legislation introduced in some state legislatures, including Arizona’s. Since April 27, 2011, when Obama published a highly problematic illustration of a birth certificate on the White House website, the debate has taken a darker turn. There is now extensive evidence that fraud and forgery took place in the creation of the White House birth certificate. What that means to the Examiner is that it now also auto-spikes columns about this evidence and other sensational news coming out of the Cold Case Posse investigation mounted by the renowned Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

Regrettably, has this year decided to spike columns on this same subject by myself and others. In fact, the silence on this epic story extends across the public square, from Left to Right, from CNN to Fox, from Democrats to Republicans. When, earlier this year, this began happening to my column in a more systematic way, I was shocked. Others, too. I will note for the record that concerned scribesexpressed outrage and alarm over such censorship, for which I remain grateful. It is a more than passing strange sensation to write about what clearly seems to be important news in our country’s history involving Americans from different states, from different walks of life — lawyers,  judges, detectives, computer experts, government officials including the president, and more — knowing full well that some outlets won’t run it because the subject is verboten in the public square. I have even come to expect this treatment on the subject, which must be some dangerous stage of complacency.

In a way, then, I almost welcome this latest, very different spike as a salutary jolt of alarm.

Here’s how Examiner editorial page editor David Freddoso explained why the column didn’t appear:

We opted not to use it this week.  We also passed over other syndicated columnists’ offerings about the insinuations against Huma Abedin.  The reason is simply that there is no hint of proof that she has done anything improper.

But the five House Republicans made no such claim. Amid their broad concerns about MB influence on US government policy-making, the members raised a red flag over Huma Abedin, Deputy Chief of Staff to the US Secretary of State. Why? Abedin’s family members have been deeply involved with groups and movements dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization. This concerns the five House members. As it should, in my opinion — which is what my fact-based opinion column argued. What we learn from this escapade is that such an opinion is not considered printable at the Examiner.

Meanwhile, as former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy writes:

A person is not required to have done anything wrong to be denied a high-ranking government position, or more immediately, the security clearance allowing access to classified information that is necessary to function in such a job. There simply need be associations, allegiances, or interests that establish a potential conflict of interest.

To sample some of what McCarthy has further reported:

1) Saleha Abedin, Huma’s mother, is a member of the Muslim Sisterhood.

2) Saleha is also a board member of the International Islamic Council for Dawa and Relief. The IICDR has been long banned in Israel for supporting Hamas.

3) Moreover it turns out that Huma Abedin herself was, until late 2008, a member of another of her mother’s Islamist organizations, the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs.

Huma’s parents actually started this institute in Saudi Arabia in the 1970s, McCarthy explains, “with the backing of Abdullah Omar Naseef.”

Who is Naseef?

McCarthy: “Naseef is a former secretary-general of the Muslim World League, which, as I’ve previously explained, has long been the Muslim Brotherhood’s principal vehicle for the international propagation of Islamic supremacist ideology. Under the auspices of the MWL, Naseef not only backed the IMMA” — which, remember, was Huma’s parents’ Saudi project — “Naseef founded the Rabita Trust, which …is a specially designated international terrorist organization under federal law.”

Can’t you just hear the background-checker? So, Huma, your folks were in business with a guy who started a designated terrorist group, your mom’s on a board of a group banned in Israel for supporting Hamas, and you want top secret clearance to work alongside the SecState…HAHAHAHAHA. 

And there’s even more, so much more.
Read more: Family Security Matters

Muslim Brotherhood: “Yes, We Will Be Masters Of The World”

by Raymond Ibrahim

During a televised interview earlier this week, Dr. Safwat Hegazy, a popular preacher in Egypt, known for his desire to unify the Arab world into a “United Arab States“—with Jerusalem for a capital—dropped the Western language and made clear what it is the Muslim Brotherhood ultimately seeks: a caliphate and world domination, which even the Supreme Guide of the Brotherhood maintains is the group’s mission.

In the interview, which Coptic Solidarity has translated with subtitles (click here), Hegazy simply declares: “If you read the literature of the Muslim Brotherhood, you will find in the literature of the Brotherhood, that which they can never abandon: The Islamic Caliphate and mastership of the world. Yes, we will be masters of the world, one of these days” (emphasis his).

Suppose Michele Bachmann is right?

 by CAL THOMAS h/t Kasey Jachim

Like the ghosts of Shakespeare’s Banquo or Dickens’ Jacob Marley, the specter of the late commie-hunting congressman from Wisconsin, Joseph McCarthy, will always be with us. It is summoned up today, by some on the left, who use it as a tool to thwart legitimate questions about people and ideologies that seek to destroy America.

According to many commentators, the McCarthy spirit has inhabited Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn. In several letters to high-ranking government officials, Bachmann has raised questions about Huma Abedin, a Muslim-American, who is deputy chief of staff to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Bachmann’s concern is Abedin’s relatives in the Middle East, some of whom—such as Abedin’s mother—she claims “are connected to Muslim Brotherhood operatives and/or organizations.” Abedin’s job, according to Bachmann, “affords her routine access to the secretary and to policymaking.” And, as a result of that access, says Bachmann, “The State Department, and in several cases, the specific direction of the secretary of state, have taken actions recently that have been enormously favorable to the Muslim Brotherhood and its interests.”

Sen. John McCain says Abedin is “a dedicated American.” Even if he is correct, the larger issue is being obscured. Many in government and the media don’t want to face the possibility that infiltration is a tactic of Islamic extremists who repeatedly say they want to destroy not only Israel but the “Great Satan” America. Such objectives should be taken seriously, given their violent history.

If you revile Rep. Bachmann, perhaps former British Prime Minister Tony Blair is more to your liking. Charles Moore of the London Daily Telegraph writes that Blair “… now thinks he underestimated the power of the bad ‘narrative’ of Islamist extremists. That narrative—that ‘The West oppresses Islam’—’is still there; if anything, it has grown.’ It seeks ’supremacy, not coexistence.’” Blair also expressed fear that “The West is asleep on this issue.”

Blair’s view is echoed in Battle for Our Minds: Western Elites and the Terror Threat, a new book by Michael Widlanski, a specialist in Arab politics and a former journalist for mainstream publications such as The New York Times, the Cox Newspapers-The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, and The Jerusalem Post. Widlanski’s main point is that political correctness has stifled the West’s ability to understand and fight terror.

Among Widlanski’s criticisms is that the West “came to rely on ‘experts’ without field experience in, or scant knowledge of, the Middle East: people who do not speak the languages, did not study the cultures, and do not know the history. Even worse, some ‘experts’ have been forgiving and even sympathetic to the terrorists and their aims.”

National Public Radio reported last month that “The FBI has conducted more than 100 investigations into suspected Islamic extremists within the military.”

What else would infiltration look like? It’s more than an academic question, or a subject for spy novelists. Those who attack Michele Bachmann should answer it.


Release Fort Hood intelligence report


An independent review of the FBI’s intelligence actions before the Nov. 5, 2009, shootings at Fort Hood is finished. We join Texas Sen. John Cornyn in calling on the agency to release an unclassified version of the report.

Friday, in a letter to FBI Director Robert Mueller, Cornyn pressed for the report’s release, calling it a “matter of tremendous public importance.”

As the Texas Republican correctly put it in his letter to Mueller, “The American people and specifically the Fort Hood community in Texas have the right to know.”

It’s clear there were intelligence failures leading up to the Fort Hood shootings, though exactly what those failures were or whether they mean the shootings could have been prevented is unknown.

News reports say the review by William Webster, a former FBI and CIA director and former federal judge, includes 18 recommendations the agency should take to sharpen future investigations and improve the sharing of information.

Questions linger about how the FBI handled information it had gathered on Maj. Nidal Hasan, an Army psychiatrist.

There also may have been misunderstandings between the FBI and a Pentagon investigator that prevented a deeper, harder look into Hasan’s activities and mental state ahead of the shootings.

Hasan is accused of opening fire with two handguns on soldiers and civilians at a medical processing center at Fort Hood. The soldiers were preparing to deploy to Afghanistan.

The shooting left 13 people dead and more than 30 wounded.

Witnesses say that Hasan said “Allahu akbar” as he began shooting. The Arabic phrase means “God is great” and is associated with Middle Eastern terrorists.

Hasan’s court-martial is scheduled to start Aug. 20 at Fort Hood. He could face the death penalty if found guilty by a jury of Army officers.

There reportedly were warning signs in the couple of years before the shootings, signalling that Hasan’s emotional state was possibly destabilizing and that he was possibly becoming radicalized.

Webster’s report is thought to focus on the FBI’s handling of numerous emails Hasan exchanged with Anwar al Awlaki, the American radical imam who was killed last year in Yemen by a U.S. drone strike. Awlaki’s communications were under FBI surveillance.

The report will be closely read to see whether the FBI has fully learned one of the key lessons of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

The FBI was criticized for failing to share information with the CIA and other intelligence agencies that might have thwarted at least some of the 9/11 hijackers. Reforms were enacted to remove some of the barriers that inhibited the FBI and CIA from working together.

Failure to coordinate information apparently endures, however.

Read more

Five Congressmen Call for Muslim Brotherhood Influence Investigations

By Ryan Mauro:

In what could prove to be a watershed moment in the fight against radical  Islam, five prominent members of Congress wrote  letters on June 13 to the Inspector Generals of the Departments of State,  Justice, Defense, Homeland Security and the Office of the Director of National  Intelligence requesting investigations into the influence of Muslim  Brotherhood-tied groups and individuals.

The letters were signed by Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), Rep. Tom Rooney  (R-FL) and Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA) of the House Permanent Select Committee  on Intelligence; Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ) of the House Armed Services Committee  and Rep. Louie Gohmert, the Vice Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee’s  Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security.

The letters refers to a 10-part, freely-available online course created by  the Center for Security Policy titled, “Muslim  Brotherhood in America,” narrated by Frank Gaffney, who served as Assistant  Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy under the Reagan  Administration. Each letter mentions incidents where the respective departments  worked with entities or individuals tied to the Muslim Brotherhood.

A secret document by  the American branch of the Muslim Brotherhood from 1991 states that its “work in  America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying Western  civilization from within.” The Brotherhood’s documents also identify many of its  fronts in the U.S., such as the Islamic  Society of North America, the Islamic  Circle of North America, the North  American Islamic Trust, the Muslim  Students Association, the International  Institute of Islamic Thought and the Islamic  Association for Palestine, from which the Council  on American-Islamic Relations was birthed.

Overseas, the Muslim Brotherhood strategy of “civilization jihad” is referred  to as “gradualism,” a doctrine I discussed at length here.  “Gradualism,” often called “stealth jihad” in the West, refers to an  incremental, phased approach towards advancing the Islamist cause that includes  a cost-benefit analysis. Western observers often misinterpret the Muslim  Brotherhood’s restraint as proof that it is moderate. In reality, this judgment  is an intelligence  failure. Israeli officials say  the Muslim Brotherhood leadership in Egypt ordered Hamas to fire rockets at  Israel just this past weekend. Hamas’ founding charter says it is a wing of the  Brotherhood and the terrorist group changed  its official name in December to reflect this.

There is a wealth of information showing why the investigations called for by  the members of Congress is necessary. The impact of the Muslim Brotherhood-tied  groups and other Islamists on the current and past administrations, both  political parties and the law enforcement and intelligence communities is  disturbing. Their agendas are aided by a media eager to defame their critics and  businesses, officials and religious organizations embracing them in the name of  interfaith relations.

The Center for Security Policy’s course calls out several serving members of  the current administration for having close ties to Muslim Brotherhood  affiliates. These include:

  • Rashad  Hussain, the current Special Envoy to the Organization  of Islamic Cooperation. He previously was a Deputy Associate Council in the  White House involved in national security policy and Muslim outreach.
  • Dalia  Mogahed, a close associate of John  Esposito, one of the foremost defenders of the Muslim Brotherhood and its  affiliates. She is in the White House’s Office of Faith-Based Neighborhood  Partnerships and is credited as the person who most  influenced President Obama’s 2009 speech in Cairo. She is a member of the  Department of Homeland Security’s Countering Violent Extremism Working  Group.
  • Huma Abedein, Deputy Chief of Staff to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton  and wife of former Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY). Several of her relatives have  ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, especially her mother who belongs  to the Muslim Sisterhood.
  • Mohamed Elibiary, who serves on the Homeland Security Advisory Committee  and reportedly  tried to leak documents to the press to paint Texas Governor Rick Perry as  having an anti-Muslim bias. He is a member of the Department of Homeland  Security’s Countering Violent Extremism Working Group.
  • Imam Mohamed Magid, President of the Islamic Society of North America  (ISNA), who has close ties with administration officials and is a member of the  Department of Homeland Security’s Countering Violent Extremism Working  Group.


The letter sent to the DHS says  that, in addition to the aforementioned three members of the Countering Violent  Extremism Working Group, “five other members…appear to share their sympathy  for Islamist causes in addition to sharing some of their associations with  organizers that are advancing such agendas in the U.S.”

Azizah  al-Hibri, who stated that “Islamic fiqh is deeper and better than Western  codes of law” and has relations with Brotherhood-tied groups, serves on the U.S.  Commission on International Religious Freedom. In April 2010, the CEO of Islamic  Relief USA, another group with with  Hamas/Brotherhood ties, was appointed to the U.S. Agency for  International Development Advisory Committee on Voluntary Foreign Aid. In  November 2011, he was appointed to the State Department’s Religion and Foreign  Policy Working Group. Sahar Aziz, who served in the Department of Homeland  Security’s Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties from 2008 to 2009, spoke  at the annual fundraiser for CAIR-Michigan on March 25. She shared the stage  with Siraj Wahhaj, an anti-American Islamist preacher.

Recently, the White House’s new Director for Community Partnerships said that  there have been “hundreds”  of meetings between departments and agencies with the Council on  American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), despite the fact that the FBI ended  outreach efforts with CAIR after the government labeled it an “unindicted  co-conspirator” in the Holy  Land Foundation trial. This designation was subsequently upheld  by a federal judge. A 2007 federal court filing  also calls CAIR a Muslim Brotherhood front that uses deception to support  terrorists. ISNA and the North American Islamic Trust were also labeled  “unindicted co-conspirators.” It has been reported  that the Justice Department actually blocked the planned prosecution of a CAIR  co-founder and others on the list  of “unindicted co-conspirators.”

The Executive-Director of CAIR’s Greater Los Angeles chapter, Hussam Ayloush,  was just elected  as a delegate to the Democratic National Convention. In August 2010, Bill  Aossey, a prominent member of the radical Islamic  Center of Cedar Rapids, went to the White House and sat at President Obama’s  table for an Iftar celebration. In 2008, then-presidential candidate Obama’s  Muslim outreach director, Mazen Asbahi, resigned  after his associations with Brotherhood-tied groups were exposed.

The administration’s interfaith efforts involve the same individuals and  groups that the five members of Congress are concerned about. Then-President of  ISNA, Ingrid  Mattson, took part in President Obama’s inaugural prayer services. The  President’s top counter-terrorism advisor, John Brennan, spoke  alongside her at New York University. Senior presidential advisor Valerie  Jarrett was the keynote  speaker at ISNA’s annual convention in 2009. After President Obama’s famous  speech in Cairo in 2009, Secretary of State Clinton invited Esam  Omeish, a supporter of Hamas involved with the Brotherhood, to take part in  a conference call.

The “Muslim Brotherhood  in America” course reveals that in 2010, the U.S. Special Envoy to Monitor  and Combat Anti-Semitism, Hannah Rosenthal, took an interfaith trip to Auschwitz  alongside eight individuals with strong Muslim Brotherhood ties. After the Fort  Hood terrorist attack, an official from ISNA was approved  to come to the base for a lecture about Islam. In February, a top Pentagon  official apologized  for the accidental burning of a Koran in Afghanistan at the mosque led by ISNA’s  president. In March 2011, Deputy National Security Advisor Denis McDonough spoke  at the mosque and praised Magid.

Individuals and organizations like these are responsible for the  administration’s belief that the Muslim Brotherhood is genuinely moderate,  non-violent and a force we can work with. This opinion was on full  display when Director of National Intelligence James Clapper testified  before Congress that the Muslim Brotherhood is “secular.” He portrayed the  Brotherhood in a positive light and continues  to do so to this day. A National Security Council spokesperson did  the same when asked about the White House’s meetings with Brotherhood  officials from Egypt. The director of the State Department’s Special Coordinator  of the Office of Middle East Transitions, William Taylor, is similarly  positive towards the Brotherhood. His office even gave election  training to Islamists in Egypt.

The relationships between these groups and law enforcement and intelligence  agencies are particularly alarming. Administration officials, including  Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano and Attorney General Eric  Holder, have met with the Muslim  Public Affairs Council (MPAC), over  two dozen times. MPAC was founded by Muslim Brotherhood supporters and works  in tandem with the other mentioned groups. On January 27-28, 2010, ISNA and a known  Brotherhood front called the Muslim  American Society joined MPAC in meeting  with Napolitano and other DHS officials.

The influence of these groups became much  greater after the controversy over the content of counter-terrorism training  materials started. A complete review of the materials began with outside  help and indeed, some of it was inappropriate. The desire to tame Muslim  outrage led to an embrace of some of these Islamist groups who consistently  misrepresent counter-terrorism practices, defame their critics as bigots and feed off  of feelings of victimization and persecution.

In October 2011, the DHS and the National Counterterrorism center distributed guidelines  on Countering Violent Extremism for law enforcement agencies to follow. It was  cleansed of references to the Islamist ideology. An MPAC paper was one of only  two non-governmental sources cited. The website of Sheriff Lee Baca, a prominent  ally of CAIR and similar groups, was also used. This is to be expected  considering who is in the DHS Countering Violent Extremism Working Group.

On February 8, FBI Director Robert Mueller met with an interfaith group that  included ISNA and MPAC. The FBI confirmed afterwards that it would consider a  proposal by the attendees to establish a committee to oversee the review of  counter-terrorism training materials.  Even now, the FBI will  not say who the three experts on Islam guiding the review are.

The Chicago Police Superintendent, Garry McCarthy, spoke  at a CAIR fundraiser in March. As mentioned before, Los Angeles County  Sheriff Lee Baca is a huge supporter of the Brotherhood-tied groups and was honored  by CAIR. The Los Angeles Police Department’s Commanding Officer of the  Counter-Terrorism and Special Operations Bureau, Deputy Chief Michael Downing,  even outrageously said at an event  with MPAC that “the message is not to demonize the Brotherhood” because it has  “evolved and changed.”

The case  of Kifah Mustapha highlights how bad things are. He was personally designated by  the federal government as an “unindicted co-conspirator” in the Holy Land trial  because he is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood’s secret “Palestine Committee”  set up in the U.S. to covertly assist Hamas. The documentation of his extremism  is irrefutable. Still, he was able to go on a six-week tour of sensitive FBI  facilities where he, as you probably assumed, asked tons of questions about  counter-terrorism procedures.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. The “Muslim  Brotherhood in America” course spends an enormous amount of time on how this  is a bi-partisan problem that became much  worse under the Bush Administration. Today, Republican New Jersey Governor  Chris Christie (click here  and here)  and Republican Senator Lindsey  Graham serve as good examples. The problem extends to state and local  governments, such as the Illinois Governor’s Muslim American Advisory Council  that includes  officials from Brotherhood groups.

It also goes beyond the government. Islamist influence,  facilitated by political  correctness, is present  in our education system.  Those concerned about this issue are oftenmocked, dismissed, misquoted and misrepresented in the media.  One stunning example  of Hollywood’s role  is how the producer of the hit films, The Matrix and The Lord of the  Rings, brought onboard Shiekh Yousef al-Qaradawi, a top  terrorism-supporting cleric, as an advisor for his film about Mohammed.

Read more: Family Security Matters

Muslim site tells children become Muslim in secret, tell parents later

Do you know where your children are? Where they are going on school class trips? What they are reading online? From a website called

If you are a Small child you can still become a Muslim without your parents permission

If you are a child you do not need your parent’s permission to become a Muslim. If you fear they may harm, you can become Muslim in secret and tell them when you are ready.

What if their are no Muslims (or no Mosque or Islamic center) in your town

Another  common question  is that there are no Muslims in the city. This too is not an obstacle in you becoming a Muslim. You do not have to go to a Masjid (Mosque) or Islamic center or know any Muslims in order to be a Muslim. You can say the declaration of faith (called the Shahadah) to yourself and from then onwards you are a Muslim. This is explained in the article below in greater detail.

And for the young girls, once you become Muslim there will be plenty of older Muslim males ready to exploit marry you.

Read more