Europe’s Rising Islam-Based Political Parties

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

Beyond ISIS: Europe’s Salafists Nurturing Jihad

headlineby Abigail R. Esman
Special to IPT News
January 3, 2017

Before there was the Islamic State, before YouTube videos that seduce Europe’s Muslims to join in the jihad, before Twitter and Tumblr and the many tools of recruitment on the Internet, there was the local mosque.

There still is.

With all the emphasis now on ISIS and its various affiliates, and on the dangers they pose against the West, we have largely forgotten the forces that were radicalizing Muslim youth in Europe long before ISIS came along. Worse, we have failed to notice they still do. And yet these largely Saudi-backed, Salafist institutions – mosques and schools and Islamic community centers – arguably pose the greatest threat to Western culture, both in terms of their potential for inspiring terrorism and the sociopolitical influence they exert.

Concerns about Salafist groups and their unwavering impact in Europe have reemerged of late, the result of numerous investigations into ties between European mosques and terror financing organizations. Added to this is a growing unrest within the European Muslim community as it struggles with its own identity and future. In the process, counterterrorism experts and government officials have increasingly been forced to acknowledge that “bombing the hell out of ISIS,” as the U.S. president-elect has sworn to do, won’t be enough to solve the problem.

Salafism – the orthodox, strictly sharia-based interpretation of Islam championed by the Saudis and at the heart of the Islamic State and similar extremist groups – is thriving in the West. And as many experts agree, Salafist ideology is where violent jihadism finds its home.

Now Europe is starting to crack down. For years, governments largely shook their heads in passive, ineffectual dismay over the Salafist mosques in their communities.  But the recent rash of terror attacks and concern about increased radicalization among European Muslim youth have spurred officials into action. In November, Germany outlawed the Salafist group “True Religion,” which distributes German translations of the Quran, calling it a “collecting pool” for jihadists. According to the New York Times, more than 140 “True Religion” members have joined ISIS in Syria or Iraq.

An estimated 820 Germans are believed to have joined the terror group, about a third of whom have since returned.

In the weeks following the ban, German media exposed further evidence of Salafist activity, thanks to a leaked intelligence report. Gulf states have actively supported Salafist mosques, schools, and associations, the report revealed, building “missionary movements” funded in part by the Saudi Muslim World League, Sheikh Eid bin Mohammed al-Thani Charitable Association, and the Kuwaiti Revival of Islamic Heritage Society, which the U.S. accuses of having ties to al-Qaida.

Yet the Saudi ambassador to Germany denies his government funds imams or maintains ties to Salafism in Germany, reports the Independent. Further, he insists that his government “does not build mosques.”

Cross the border into Belgium, however, and such claims quickly crumble. Rather, the country’s largest mosque, located in the midst of Brussels’ EU Quarter, is widely known as a “hotbed for Salafist radicalization,” according to Die Welt. And it has been financed for nearly 50 years by the Saudis, who also train its imams.

The Saudi connection was part of an oil financing deal made between the Gulf state and then-king Baudouin of Belgium in 1967. In exchange for favorable oil prices, Saudi Arabia received  a 99-year lease on the property and the right to train imams. Indeed, according to the Washington Post, “Saudi Arabia … invested in training the imams who would preach to a growing Muslim diaspora in European countries, including in Belgium.”

Essentially, as Die Welt reports, Belgium “gave the House of Saud carte blanche to spread the message of Salafism.”

The Islamic Cultural Center at the Great Mosque of Brussels continues the tradition, parlaying its message into the classes it offers to about 700 children, and into its training of a new generation of imams.

This kind of deep integration of conservative, Salafist Islam into the communities of Western Europe is, however, not unique to Belgium. In the Netherlands, officials abandoned an effort earlier this year to outlaw Salafism. It would “intervene in people’s personal religious beliefs,” thereby violating Holland’s constitution, Social Affairs Minister Lodewijk Asscher said at the time.

Yet at a Salafist Koran school in Utrecht, students are taught to reject Western norms in favor of their orthodox Muslim ideals, according to four former students, who independently described their experiences to the Dutch newspaper Volkskrant.

And it isn’t just in Utrecht. In Amsterdam, conflicts, sometimes violent, have broken out in mosques between the more moderate old garde and a more conservative, younger generation, as Dutch Muslims battle over their identity. “It is five to twelve,” city council member Sofyan Mbarki, himself a Muslim, warned last summer about the growing Salafism in the Amsterdam mosques.

Several recent investigations into Salafist organizations across the country have turned up some eye-opening links to terror groups. In Eindhoven, for instance, the Al-Waqf organization was recently accused of having financial ties to al-Qaida. One of the country’s largest Muslim organizations, Al Waqf runs the Eindhoven Al Fourqaan Mosque. Its imam, Ismail Bakri, according to Holland’s NRC Handelsblad, also is the treasurer and co-founder of the Association des Savants Musulmans (ASM) in Bern, Switzerland. The ASM also has offices in Qatar and Gaza.

The ASM is no ordinary Muslim group. The United States identifies two ASM board members as terror financiers: Kuwaiti Abdul Mohsen al-Mutairi allegedly raised money for Jabhat al Nusra in Syria, and Yemeni politician Abdel Wahab Humaiqani is alleged to have financial ties to al-Qaida. The U.S. also believes he was behind a 2012 terrorist bombing in Yemen.

That’s not all. ASM is allied with the Qatari Eid Charity, research by Dutch analyst Carel Brendel shows. The other name for the Eid Charity? Sheikh Eid bin Mohammed al-Thani Charitable Association – the same group cited by Germany’s intelligence report on Gulf-state funding of Salafist mosques and schools.

Dutch officials put a stop to ASM’s plans to build another institute that included a school, in Rotterdam, noting links exposed in WikiLeaks documents to Hamas and suspicions it provided funds for Al Nusra. Moreover, the NRC report says that charity founder Abd al-Rahman al Nu’aymi is thought to be a major fundraiser for al-Qaida in Syria and Iraq.

Nonetheless, Dutch directors of the planned project insist that there is no affiliation with extremism.

True or not, Rotterdam has plenty of other problems, as a number of terrorist arrests throughout the past year have made clear. And nationally, extremist ideologies are working their way into the mainstream. In one shocking recent incident, the Meldpunt Internetdiscriminatie (MiND), which addresses concerns about discrimination on the internet, refused to intervene when several Dutch Muslims responded to an online article about a gay group in Morocco by calling for gays to be burned and beheaded. In a letter to the unnamed person who filed the complaint, MiND wrote, “the comments should be seen in the context of Islamic beliefs, which from a legal standpoint keeps them from qualifying as insulting. Some Muslims believe that the Koran states homosexuals should be killed.”

In other words, if the Quran calls for homosexuals to be beheaded, then there is nothing wrong with Muslims calling for homosexuals to be beheaded. Context is key.

To its credit, after a Dutch web site posted MiND’s letter online, the outcry that followed led to a “re-evaluation” on MiND’s part, and the determination that religious context should not apply to calls for violence. A similar situation took place in Germany in 2007, when a judge denied an abused Muslim woman a divorce, citing a Quranic verse that encourages husbands to beat “disobedient” wives. The case was later retried.

For the most part, however, European officials seem at a loss, unsure of how to handle the new Salafist chic. Seeking answers in the aftermath of the attacks in Paris and Brussels, reporters at Holland’s Financieel Dagblad turned last March to one of the best-known faces of moderate Islam in the Netherlands, Ahmed Marcouch, a Moroccan-born former Amsterdam police officer who now serves in the House of Representatives. Marcouch has been outspoken about the dangers of Salafism, which he has called a totalitarian, anti-democratic ideology that is “spitting its poison into our society.”

“Is the Netherlands too naïve, then, about Salafism?” the FD asked him.

“Yes,” he said.

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

All Hands on Deck

trump-1

Understanding the Threat, by John Guandolo, November 9, 2016:

The historic election on Tuesday was a resounding rejection of failed socialist programs, weak government leaders, and corruption/tyranny on both sides of the political aisle.

From a national security perspective, this is not the time to find “common ground” with those who oppose liberty and our Constitutional Republic.

This is the beginning of a battle in America to restore our founding principles and defeat the Islamic and Marxist Movements in this nation.  If we do not accomplish this now, we will have squandered this great opportunity.

Remember, this is much more a counterintelligence and espionage war than it is a fight against “terrorism.”  We need leaders who get it at a deep level.

This is not the time to bring in people from the RNC – the very same establishment flunkies who lost the wars for us in Afghanistan and Iraq and the ones Americans voted against Tuesday – to help solve our problems.

Already, individuals working against U.S. interests and/or for the jihadi or marxists Movements are inside the Trump camp.

Oz Sultan, a jihadi who works on the Park 51 (Ground Zero Mosque) project is on the inside thanks to the RNC.

Additionally, names like Senator Bob Corker (TN), who helped architect the failed Iran deal, Congressman Mike McCaul who drove and funded the Muslim Brotherhood’s CVE (Combatting Violent Extremism) program, and Governor Chris Christie who defends jihadis and attacks those who speak truth about them, are all being considered for senior cabinet positions.  Mr. Christie was also hailed by Hamas in the U.S. doing business as CAIR for advancing the Islamic agenda here.

These men are significant impediments to victory in this war and should have no place in a Trump administration.

Many other hostile individuals and forces are circling Mr. Trump in an effort to gain favor.  Think jihadis in suits and those they use to get what they want, and you will begin to understand the true nature of the threat.

UTT offers President elect Trump, 14 recommendation as strategic launch points in this war to begin this endeavor to restore our national security.

  1. Designate the Muslim Brotherhood a Foreign Terrorist Organization
  2. Indict unindicted co-conspirators in US v HLF beginning with ISNA, NAIT & CAIR
  3. Implement the UTT strategy to systematically dismantle the Islamic Movement in the United States and educate/train all federal, state, and local agencies on this threat whose duties include law enforcement, intelligence, or security
  4. Shut down the Refugee Resettlement program
  5. Freeze all immigration into the U.S. for at least 5 years, and secure U.S. borders
  6. Create a strategy to address and systematically dismantle the Marxist Movement in the United States beginning with colleges/universities, as well as barring any Federal agency from receiving training from Marxist groups (to include the Southern Poverty Law Center)
  7. Criminally charge U.S. leaders and organizations who aid and abet America’s enemies
  8. Rebuild U.S. Military forces, and eliminate all policies which put anything in front of the military’s primary duty to fight and win wars
  9. Dismantle U.S. tax code doing away with federal income tax over four years (pay for infrastructure as founders intended)
  10. Shut down all federal programs/agencies not specifically provided for in the U.S. Constitution
  11. Institute Citizen Training Programs in elementary, junior high and high schools to teach and reaffirm America’s true history, founding principles, and Godly heritage
  12. Rebuild America’s broken Counterintelligence apparatus
  13. Repeal the 17th Amendment
  14. Outlaw foreign ownership of property inside the United States

Over the next couple weeks, UTT will review these recommendations in detail.

Be vigilant America.  Now is the time we need all hands on deck to pay attention and immediately make your voice heard when needed.

Hamas Teaches Its Followers How to Shut Down UTT Law Enforcement Training

(L to R) U.S. Hamas Leader Nihad Awad and Hamas operatives Ibrahim Hooper and Corey Saylor

(L to R) U.S. Hamas Leader Nihad Awad and Hamas operatives Ibrahim Hooper and Corey Saylor

Understanding the Threat, by John  Guandolo, Sept. 6, 2016:

On August 21, 2016, Hamas (dba CAIR) conducted a briefing in Longwood, Florida led by Hamas leader Hassan Shibly (Director of CAIR Florida).  The briefing was focused on the “anti-Muslim network in the United States” and how to keep truthful information (“Islamophobia” according to them) from reaching local and state law enforcement.

The entire presentation can be found HERE.

The Council on American Islamic Relations – aka CAIR – is a Hamas entity.  There is no factual basis to dispute this.  CAIR is Hamas and Hamas is designated a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the government of the United States and many other nations in the world.

At UTT (Understanding the Threat) we refer to CAIR as “Hamas (dba/doing business as CAIR)” because that is who they are.  They are suit-wearing jihadis and should be treated as such.

As a matter of fact, when UTT’s own Chris Gaubatz was undercover as an “intern” at Hamas (dba CAIR), one of the documents he discovered, entitled “Proposed Muslim Platform for 2004” (dated 3/08/2004) was a planning memo in which leaders of CAIR stated they would work directly with Osama bin Laden. The document stated:  “Attempt to understand Islamic movements in the area, and start supporting Islamic groups including Mr. bin Laden and his associates.”

Now that we are clear about who is giving the presentation about “Islamophobia” we can continue.

In this brief clip from the presentation in Longwood, Florida, Hamas operative Corey Saylor states John Guandolo, founder and President of UTT teaches law enforcement officers that the Director of Central Intelligence John Brennan is a “secret Muslim” and mosques have no First Amendment rights.

In fact, UTT does not mention John Brennan in its 3-day “Understanding and Investigating the Jihadi Network” which details the threats from the Global Islamic Movement to the communities in which UTT teaches.

UTT does, however, teach how Hamas (dba CAIR) and the broader Muslim Brotherhood (MB) define an “Islamic Center/Mosque” and view its role per their own documents entered into evidence in the largest terrorism financing and Hamas trial ever successfully prosecuted in American history – US v Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (“HLF”), Dallas 2008.

[See “An Explanatory Memorandum” page 24]

The MB defines an Islamic Center/Mosque as the place in which jihadis are housed and trained, and the place from which the jihad will be launched.  UTT, in its program then uses the Mosque Survey – which was produced by Hamas (dba CAIR) – which states that in 2010 there were 2106 Islamic Centers/Mosques in the United States.  Most of these mosques are owned/controlled by the MB and, therefore, are hostile to to the U.S. and its citizens.

In discussing HOW to respond to UTT training, Corey Saylor teaches other Hamas trainees/operatives how to “embarrass” the law enforcement hosts to shut down the program and have the continuing education credits removed.

In all of this it must be remembered that CAIR is Hamas, and this is a war.  In this case, Hamas is waging a war to bring pressure on law enforcement agencies to shut down any training that speaks truth into the threat the Global Islamic Movement poses so local and state law enforcement officers will not know the truth about the threats facing their communities.

The response from law enforcement to the UTT 3-day program is always the same:  few if any of the law enforcement officers know the information presented, and all of them agree the information UTT teaches is critical to keeping their neighborhoods safe.

How Much Popular Support Does CAIR Have Among American Muslims?

cair-1
Islamist Watch, by Johanna Markind, June 14, 2015:

Originally published at PJ Media under the title, “Does CAIR Represent Boston’s Muslim Community? The World May Never Know: How Many American State Chapters Does CAIR Really Have?”

The Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), an unindicted co-conspirator in America’s largest terrorism financing case, which is officially banned from FBI cooperation, claims to be a mainstream organization advocating for the civil rights of American Muslims. Shortly after Usaama Rahim was shot in Boston, CAIR leapt into action. The national organization, that is.

Its National Communications Director, Ibrahim Hooper, was quoted in an AP story on the day of the shooting as identifying Rahim, who was communicating with ISIS and under 24-hour surveillance by the Joint Terrorism Task Force, and serving as an intermediary with Rahim’s family. Hooper was also quoted by ABC, asserting that CAIR “will monitor the investigation” of the shooting. Its National Civil Rights Litigation Director, Jenifer Wicks, was quoted in a June 3 Boston Globe story, asking for an independent and thorough investigation “given the recent high profile shootings of African-American men.” Wicks’ name also appeared on a June 3 press release the national organization issued about the shooting.

Defunct link to CAIR Massachusetts

Although the press release coyly refers to “CAIR-Boston,” and although Hooper told MSNBC “two of our Massachusetts chapter board members were in the meeting” at which authorities showed the surveillance video of the shooting, there is no local chapter there – hence the need for the national office to jump in. One finds an occasional reference to CAIR Massachusetts as, for instance, on the CAIR Kansas website, but the link is defunct. The telephone directory has no listing of a number forCAIR or Council of American-Islamic Relations in Boston. CAIR’s chapter list, which records a total of 28 chapters (a Washington office and 27 state chapters), does not mention any CAIR branch in the state.

Defunct chapter links on CAIR Kansas webpage

On previous occasions, CAIR proudly proclaimed that it had at least 32 chapters. Back in July 2007, CAIR claimed to have grown to 33 chapters. In another publication from the same month, it claimed to have a total of 32 chapters across the United States. Five years later, it was claiming the same number of 32, “nationwide and in Canada.” Somehow it lost at least four United States chapters in the interim. There is a website for a National Council of Canadian Muslims, elsewhere referred to as CAIR-CAN; even if this is a vibrant organization, there is no information about local chapters. Counting Canada, CAIR has a total of 29 chapters.

Defunct chapter links on CAIR Ohio webpage

CAIR websites (e.g., CAIR Kansas and CAIR Ohio) list defunct hyperlinks to CAIR Georgia, Nevada, New Jersey, and South Carolina, in addition to Massachusetts. CAIR’s list identifies chapters in Georgia and Kentucky but atypically lists no website or email address for either. It does include a hyperlink to a website for CAIR New Jersey, but the account has been “suspended.” It lists no chapters in Nevada, South Carolina, or Massachusetts. None of these chapters or pseudo-chapters (Massachusetts, Georgia, Kentucky, Nevada, New Jersey, or South Carolina) has its own employer identification number (EIN).

There was an Atlanta-based “NGA” chapter, which had its own EIN, but it appears to be defunct. It has not filed a tax return since 2008, and reported no income after 2006. Its website returns “server not found,” and it does not appear on CAIR’s list.

Let’s return to CAIR’s national office. In 2000, the year before 9/11, it had a membership of 29,000. By 2006, five years after 9/11, membership had dropped to under 1,700. In 2000, it received $732,765 income from membership dues. By 2004, which is to say, three years after 9/11, this Muslim Brotherhood organization claimed to have received only$119,029 income from membership dues. Its income for the latter part of the decade cannot be determined because, for three years, it failed to file tax returns with the Internal Revenue Service. For the years 2011-2013, it reported zero income from membership dues.

As for fundraising, CAIR netted $106,879 this way in 2011, $233,084 in 2012, and only $39,732 in 2013.

Amazingly, it still has plenty of money. In 2011, CAIR received $3,964,990 in “contributions, gifts, [or] grants.” In 2012, it received $1,581,411. In 2013, the amount was $2,201,843.

For the years 2011-2013, CAIR reported the following income:

It should also be noted that in 2005, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, Inc., set up a new corporation, CAIR Foundation, Inc., transferred some assets to the new entity (“new CAIR”), and eventually renamed itself the Washington Trust Foundation, Inc. The relationship between the two corporations is, at best, confusing, with hundreds of thousands of dollars being lent back and forth between the two.

In 2013, Washington Trust Foundation (“old CAIR”) reported “contributions, gifts, [or] grants” totaling $381,500. It reported no income from membership dues or fundraising events.

It’s unclear from where new or old CAIR’s money is coming, but one thing is clear: it isn’t membership dues from the American Muslims CAIR claims to represent, and little is coming from formal fundraising efforts to the American Muslim community. Whatever persons or groups are financing CAIR – which last year the United Arab Emirates designated as a terrorist organization – it is reasonable to suppose that CAIR is representing their interests, not those of its “membership.”

Even if the national CAIR organization truly represented its “membership” in the national American Muslim community, why is it pretending to represent the Massachusetts Muslim community?

Johanna Markind is Associate Counselor for Middle East Forum.

Also see:

A Lesson on Free Speech and Sharia in Knoxville

lk-450x137by Andrew Harrod:

A recent legal victory by Freedom X upheld the right of private citizens to discuss openly sharia law at a Knoxville, Tennessee, high school. “This is a victory for free speech,” Freedom X’s President William J. Becker rightly explained, in yet another instructive example of Islamists seeking to subvert the United States Constitution’s First Amendment.

A local Knoxville chapter of ACT! for America began the case by arranging an April 24 evening town hall at Farragut High School (FHS). The event featured Dr. Bill French, Center for the Study of Political Islam founder under the pen name Warner, and Matt Bonner, regional director of the Crescent Project, a Christian evangelization ministry for Muslims. They intended to address the encroachment in America of sharia, vaguely described in one online report as “Islamic laws governing worship and lifestyle.” Becker correctly clarifies that “Sharia is incompatible with our constitutional and legal protections” in numerous ways.

Both local and national Muslims groups, however, greeted the event with harsh opposition. Abdel Rahman Murphy, a Muslim chaplain at the University of Tennessee in Knoxville, emailed then FHS principal Mike F. Reynolds on April 8 requesting the event’s cancellation. The town hall flyer had “kind of an aggressive tone,” Murphy argued to reporters. “Feel free hosting” the event “anywhere else by renting out a banquet hall,” Murphy added, “but to host it at a public place…is not comfortable for the rest of us.”

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a radical faux civil rights group and an unindicted terrorism financing coconspirator, also objected. An April 11 CAIR news release publicized a letter by CAIR National Communications Director Ibrahim Hooper to FHS the previous day that “vilifies…French, Bonner and ACT! for America” with a “false attribution” of “anti-Muslim hate” refuted by Becker’s complaint. “We support the First Amendment right to free speech—even…hate speech used by these speakers,” Hooper argued. The “need for a safe and inclusive learning environment,” though, makes a “school…not the proper setting.”

Principal Reynolds’ April 10 letter to Knox County Schools Superintendent James P. McIntyre, Jr. shared Hooper’s sentiments. “Groups promoting hate rather than tolerance” would have the event “serve as a public forum for harassment and bullying practices that contradict the open-minded, academic discussion we seek to…foster at” FHS, Murphy wrote. The event would generate “little positive press or educational benefit,” yet “polarize our community” when “deemed ours by association.” Concerns of “potential backlash” and “future security threats” from “retaliation of opposing groups” existed. These “expressed concerns…about…disruption” from an event unsuitable for “a safe, healthy and comfortable learning environment” caused McIntyre to rescind ACT!’s invitation in an April 11 letter to its Knoxville chapter leaders.

A Knoxville school official was “happy to announce” ACT!’s uninviting. Hooper boasted of the school’s decision, arguing that “this event in a public school would send an implicit message of endorsement for the bigoted views of the speakers.” Knoxville schools must “remain a safe place for all students,” concurred Remziya Suleyman from the Tennessee-based Muslim organization, American Center for Outreach.

The Knoxville ACT! chapter’s president John Peach held the event in a church, not seeking other public venues for fear of another cancellation. “Sharia is not well-understood and we wanted to inform the public” as “concerned Americans,” Peach said. An “American…should” not “be afraid to speak out on public matters in a public forum.”

Peach noted that Muslim groups such as the Saudi-backed Muslim Students Association, meanwhile, could openly operate unopposed at the University of Tennessee Knoxville campus. “If it’s right for Muslims to host events in tax-funded public facilities, then what is wrong with a group of citizens wanting the same,” he asked. “This is a great example of what Sharia Law is doing to America.”

Read more at Frontpage