Judiciary Committee Approves Muslim Brotherhood Terror Designation Bill Despite Apologists

2861959663

CSP, by Kyle Shideler, Feb. 24, 2016:

The House Judiciary Committee approved H.R. 3892, the “Muslim Brotherhood Terrorism Designation Act” in a party line vote of 17-10 today, with all Republicans voting in favor. The bill calls for the U.S. State Department to either designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group or formally state their reasons why the group cannot be listed.

To open the hearing, Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), read directly from “An Explanatory Memorandum: On the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America,” a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood strategic document seized in a terrorism raid, and submitted at the Holy Land Foundation terrorism finance trial. Goodlatte quoted the memo’s author, Mohammed Akram Adlouni, who wrote that the Brotherhood’s “Work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”

Goodlatte noted the Brotherhood’s role in extorting and materially supporting global terrorism and pointed out that designation of the Muslim Brotherhood would require the Obama Administration deny admission to foreign aliens with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Obama Administration’s willingness to admit Muslim Brotherhood members with ties to terrorism has been a point of contention with Congress. In May of 2014 the Senate Oversight Committee began an investigation  into a reported DHS “Hands Off List” which permitted high ranking Muslim Brotherhood leader Jamal Badawi to enter the country, despite terrorism ties. Early in the Obama Administration, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton personally waived a ban on entry for Tariq Ramadan, a Muslim Brotherhood leader in Europe and the grandson of Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan Al Banna. Ramadan had been banned from the U.S. under President Bush for providing funds to Hamas-linked charities.

The bill was opposed by Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), who accused the bill of “Islamophobia” pushed for political purposes. Conyers took the opportunity to submit into the record statements on behalf of John L. Esposito, a Georgetown University professor, and the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR.)

Perhaps ironically, both Esposito and CAIR have extensive Muslim Brotherhood ties. Esposito was a former advisory board member for the Hamas/MB think tank known as the United Association for Studies And Research (UASR), founded by Deputy Hamas Chairman Mousa abu Marzook. UASR is actually explicitly named in the bill, which makes Esposito’s statement particularly self-serving. Esposito also has ties to the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), a think tank investigated for ties to Al Qaeda, Hamas, and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Esposito has made something of a career defending the Muslim Brotherhood from accusations of terrorism, including at the Holy Land Foundation Trial and during the UK report on the Muslim Brotherhood carried out last year at the request of Prime Minister David Cameron.

The Council on American Islamic Relations on the other hand isn’t just supportive of the Muslim Brotherhood, they are the Muslim Brotherhood, a fact noted within the text of the bill’s findings.

According to testimony of FBI agents and documents submitted as evidence in federal trial, CAIR was founded subsequent to an October 2-3, 1993 meeting in Philadelphia of the Palestine Committee,which the Department of Justice described as a covert organization established by members of the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States to order to support Hamas. A 1994 Palestine Committee document submitted at Federal trial identifies CAIR as one of its “working organizations.” An FBI affidavit obtained by FOIA request identifies Omar Ahmad (a.k.a Omar Yehya) one of CAIR’s founders as a “one of the leaders of Hamas.” The same affidavit notes that Palestine Committee members “were also active US MB members.” CAIR founders Omar Ahmad and Nihad Awad were both named by the FBI during Federal trial as Palestine Committee members. Both men’s names appear in a phonebook of Palestine Committee members submitted at federal trial. In 1994, CAIR executive Director Nihad Awad was videotaped publicly announcing his support for Hamas.

Conyers himself has a long history of associating with CAIR, including attending annual banquets. According to “Islamist Money Watch”, a program of the Middle East Forum, Conyers has received thousands of dollars from individuals linked to the Muslim Brotherhood, including $2000 from Muthanna Al-Hanooti in 1998. Al-Hanooti was director of CAIR Michigan suspected of being paid with oil contracts to cooperate with Iraqi intelligence in the run up to the 2003 Iraq War. Hanooti was convicted of sanctions violations. Hanooti’s late father, Mohammed Al-Hanooti was also a major Muslim Brotherhood leader, who was reported by the FBI to have raised $6 million for Hamas.

The Muslim Brotherhood Terror Designation bill was briefly amended in order to streamline the bill by removing the bill’s “Findings” section, which provided an extensive list of facts regarding the Muslim Brotherhood and its role in Islamic terrorism around the globe, including in Egypt where it has overtly engaged in terrorist activities against the government, and in the United States, where it has conducted terrorism finance and recruitment activities.

While a positive first step, the bill’s passage at the judiciary committee is only one of several likely hurdles that will need to be passed, including markups in the Foreign Affairs Committee and other relevant committees. In the House the bill is authored by Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL) and has 28 Co-Sponsors. In the Senate, the companion bill S.2230 is sponsored by Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX).

Also see:

“Ikhwan-101” – Georgetown Profs Team Up With Suspected MB Front

1326by Abha Shankar
IPT News
January 7, 2016

Two of Georgetown University’s top faculty in religion are partnering with a private Virginia think tank long suspected of serving as a front for the Muslim Brotherhood.

The think tank in question, the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), twice has been the subject of law enforcement investigations, once during the 1980s and again starting in 2003. Its senior leaders were listed among “members and leaders of the IKHWAN [Muslim Brotherhood]” in the United States in records obtained by the IPT from a closed FBI investigation through a Freedom of Information Act request.

Georgetown professors John Voll and Jonathan Brown each are listed as faculty members at the Fairfax Institute, an IIIT school. Voll and Brown also occupy senior faculty positions at Georgetown’s Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding (ACMCU).

The center received a $20 million gift from Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal in 2005.

The Fairfax Institute offers certificates in Imam and Muslim Community Leadership and in Islamic Thought. That may sound benign on its face, but the Institute’s parent, the IIIT, long has touted the “Islamization of Knowledge,” a program which makes Islam the key to solving society’s ills.

In implementation plans, IIIT co-founder Ismail al-Faruqi made it clear his institute’s outreach was not about teaching Westerners about Islam. Rather, its purpose is to infuse superior Islamic principles to add revelation to Western academic pursuits which are based solely on “reasoning.”

While the Muslim community in the undeveloped world “is in many respects backward,” Faruqi wrote in 1982, “…in the respect of possessing the truth, the ideological statement of it which is most conducive to religious, ethical, and material prosperity at the same time, the ummah is second to none. Because of Islam, the ummah alone possesses the vision required for the felicity of humankind, for history to be as Allah (SWT) has desired it to be.”

During a 2010 lecture, Voll described Faruqi, a Muslim Brotherhood luminary who was murdered in 1986, as “a good case of the modern intellectual who is a believer and provides a good example for thinking about what it means to be a ‘believing intellectual’ in the modern era.”

ACMCU founding director John Esposito was a student of Faruqi’s at Temple University.

IIIT, located about 22 miles from Washington, D.C. in Herndon, Va., also was investigated for possible terror financing. A 2003 search warrant affidavit alleged that the think tank was part of a network of up to 100 non-profit and for-profit organizations, inter-related through corporate officers and holding companies that facilitated terrorist funding. Financial records reviewed by law enforcement officials exhibited “a convoluted web of multiple transactions between related corporations and charities that made it virtually impossible for federal investigators to ascertain where the money … ultimately went.”

Some of the money that was clearly traceable included direct payments to a Florida think-tank which then was home to at least four members of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad‘s Shura Council, in effect, its governing board. One of those directors, Ramadan Shallah, has led the terrorist group since late 1995.

Sami Al-Arian, a former University of South Florida professor who created the World and Islam Studies Enterprise (WISE), self-identified as the PIJ board’s secretary. Al-Arian also ran a charity called the Islamic Committee for Palestine (ICP) which wasdescribed as “the active arm of the Islamic Jihad Movement Palestine” but was called ICP in America “for security reasons.” ICP rallies routinely featured PIJ spiritual leader Abdel Aziz Odeh and PIJ imagery.

IIIT President Taha Jaber Al-Alwani “spoke at ICP conferences with Al-Arian, Shallah, Sheik Odeh (spiritual leader and co-founder of PIJ) and Sheik Rahman (the ‘Blind Sheik’ convicted of conspiracy to blow up New York tunnels and the United Nations in New York in October 1995). Inasmuch as ICP conferences were, in essence, PIJ conferences, Alwani has long been a supporter of PIJ,” the 2003 affidavit said.

In a 1992 letter to Al-Arian, Al-Alwani referred to WISE as “a part of us and an extension of us.” Records also list Al-Alwani as chairman of the WISE board of trustees.

In a 2014 IIIT promotional video, Voll says the institute helps American academics "have a more global view of Islam."

In a 2014 IIIT promotional video, Voll says the institute helps American academics “have a more global view of Islam.”

A look at past statements by Voll and Brown shows their consistent pattern of embracing and defending Islamists, including Al-Arian, who was deported from the United States a year ago and is believed to be in Turkey.

A 2007 article Voll co-authored with Esposito described Al-Arian as “a proud and committed American and Palestinian professor and activist” and claimed that both Al-Arian and the American justice system has become “casualties of the erosion of civil liberties post-9/11.”

Brown, likewise, has played down the threat from radical Islamists, and has alleged rising Islamophobia to have led to wrongful convictions in a number of federally-prosecuted terrorism cases.

Muslims care about a lot of issues, Brown said last May at a conference organized by the Islamist groups Muslim American Society and the Islamic Circle of North America. That includes events in Kashmir, the Palestinian cause and more. “Or whether it’s here in America, whether it’s Muslims targeted for entrapment by the Justice Department or whether it’s Muslims who are convicted of crimes that they didn’t commit because the justice system is biased against them. Because racism and stereotypes against Muslims are allowed to influence the outcome of trials.” (8:15 in the video)

This, he claimed, has a chilling effect on free speech.

“It’s scary to get up and speak out about Palestine, it’s scary to get up and speak about how Muslims who are accused of terrorism might not be guilty and we need to give them the benefit of the doubt.” (8:40 in the video)

In a July 2011 interview with The Egyptian Gazette, Brown dismissed any danger from Islamists gaining power in the Egyptian elections following the overthrow of President Hosni Mubarak: “I do not think life in Egypt will dramatically change if the president or ruling party are self-proclaimed ‘Islamists.’ Egypt is already a very Islamic society: no-one drinks in the street, people dress conservatively, even the financial system has to justify its operations in terms of Islam.”

“The country is too important to write off and this is not 1979,” he added. “The ‘Islamic threat’ so often touted by Western pundits has been undermined by factors like AK Party rule in Turkey, and it will be less frightening when people see that Egypt is not much different from before.”

But once in power, the Brotherhood moved to amend the Constitution to entrench its hold on government, and violently suppressed public protests. Brown was right to distinguish Egypt from Iran in 1979, though. Egypt, unlike the Islamic Republic, still had an independent military which forced the Islamists from power after spontaneous street demonstrations attracted millions of people demanding change.

Voll and Brown already enjoy ample interaction with Islamists through their Georgetown faculty posts.

The ACMCU had to postpone a program on “Egypt and the Struggle for Democracy” in the fall of 2013, after it was revealed that the only Coptic Christian panelist invited was a member of Egypt’s Nazi Party.

At a 2012 IamY (Inspiring American Muslim Youth) convention, Brown claimed Muslims were falsely implicated in terrorist cases and blamed Islamophobia for this. As an example, he cited the case of a Staten Island man who was “tried for including the Hizballah channel in a cable package he’s offering.” The Staten Island man, who Brown claimed was “not even doing anything…just offering a cable channel,” in factpleaded guilty to providing support to the terrorist group Hizballah and was sentenced to 5½ years in prison.

Brown further asserted that al-Qaida operative Tarek Mehanna was convicted “because he simply put up on his website some al-Qaida videos with translations.” Mehanna was sentenced to 17½ years in prison in 2012 on terrorism-related charges that included travel to the Middle East to obtain military-type training at a terrorist camp to prepare for jihad against U.S. interests, including American and allied troops stationed in Iraq.

He also criticized the long prison sentences meted out to several senior officials tied to the Holy Land Foundation for funneling millions of dollars to the U.S.-designated terrorist group Hamas: “You have people now, people who ran the Holy Land Foundation charity organization in this country in prison for 60-80 years. Underground, for what? Feeding orphans?” In 2008 a federal jury found all defendants in the trialguilty on all counts of helping finance Hamas.

Brown’s boss at Georgetown University, John Esposito, testified as an expert witness for the defense.

In comments provided to the IPT, Jeffrey Bale, an expert on violent political and religious extremism at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey (MIIS), California, expressed concern at “the affiliation of Professors Voll and Brown with a school linked to the IIIT, a well-known component of the Muslim Brotherhood network in the U.S.”

“Both students and other observers who recognize the essentially anti-democratic agendas of such Islamist groups should be concerned about this formal affiliation with the Fairfax Institute because it is another indicator of the pro-Islamist biases of these particular academics,” Bale said.

Despite its known radical ties, IIIT continues to operate ostensibly as a legitimate academic institution that seeks to “bridge the intellectual divide between the Islamic tradition and Western civilization” through various funding and outreach programs with mainstream American universities and colleges and government-funded institutions.

In 2005, in line with its funding of WISE at USF in the 1990s, the Virginia think tank offered to endow a chair in Islamic Studies at the University of Central Florida outside Orlando. IIIT also made a $1.5 million grant to George Mason University in 2008 to help expand its Islamic studies program.

IIIT tax records list similar grants, including $25,000 to Georgetown University in 2010; $597,000 to Nazareth College in Rochester, N.Y. between 2008-2012 as well as an additional $500,000 gift for Nazareth to fund the IIIT Chair of Interfaith Studies; $25,000 to Clarion University Foundation in 2009; $5,000 to Binghamton University(The State University of New York) in 2009; and $10,000 to the Eastern Mennonite University in 2010.

In addition, IIIT signed a memorandum of agreement with Shenandoah University in Winchester, Va., to promote academic exchanges that included hosting a program on Islam in collaboration with the radical Muslim Student Association and Student Life’s Intercultural Programs at Shenandoah University.

Not every university has taken IIIT’s money, however. In 2008, Temple University – where Faruqi once taught Esposito – refused $1.5 million in funding from IIIT for a chair in Islamic studies after concerns were raised about IIIT’s alleged ties to terrorist organizations.

In addition to Georgetown professors serving on the faculty of the Fairfax Institute, the IPT investigation found that the Institute recently offered a course taught by instructors from Georgetown University’s The Bridge Initiative titled, “Understanding Islamophobia in America.”

“Students will learn about the history of the term ‘Islamophobia’ and its earliest manifestations; its parallels with similar prejudices that have affected other groups through time; the primary mechanisms that drive Islamophobia in the United States; its emergence in both liberal and conservative discourse; its manifestations in mainstream and social media; and creative ways to counter it,” a course syllabus posted on the institute’s website reads.

It comes as little surprise that the Initiative’s project director is John Esposito.

Don’t Blame the Charlie Hebdo Mass Murder on ‘Extremism’

pic_giant_010715_SM_Hebdo-Attack-MainNational Review, By Andrew C. McCarthy:

There are now at least twelve confirmed dead in the terrorist attack carried out by at least three jihadist gunmen against the Paris office of Charlie Hebdo. While it practices equal-opportunity satire, lampooning Islam has proved lethal for the magazine, just as it has for so many others who dare to exercise the bedrock Western liberty of free expression. Charlie Hebdo’s offices were firebombed in 2011 over a caricature of Mohammed that depicted him saying, “100 lashes if you don’t die from laughter.”

The cartoon was obviously referring to sharia, Islam’s legal code and totalitarian framework. Don’t take my word for it. Just flip through Reliance of the Traveller: A Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law, the authoritative sharia manual. You will find a number of offenses for which flagellation is the prescribed penalty.

To take just a couple of examples, “the penalty for drinking is to be scourged forty stripes,” although the caliph (the Islamic ruler) is authorized to increase this to 80 stripes — although he must pay an indemnity if death results. . . . Pretty moderate, right? (Reliance, p. 617, sec. o16.3.) For adultery “the penalty consists of being scourged one hundred stripes” — and that’s if the adulterer “is not considered to have the capacity to remain chaste” (e.g., if she “is prepubescent at the time of marital intercourse.” “If the offender is someone with the capacity to remain chaste, then he or she is stoned to death.” (Reliance, p. 610, sec. o12.2.)

What Charlie Hebdo has satirized is a savage reality. That reality was visited on the magazine again today. As night follows day, progressive governments in Europe and the United States are already straining to pretend that this latest atrocity is the wanton work of “violent extremists,” utterly unrelated to Islam. You are to believe, then, that François Hollande, Barack Obama, David Cameron, and their cohort of non-Muslim Islamophiles are better versed in sharia than the Muslim scholars who’ve dedicated their lives to its study and have endorsed such scholarly works as Reliance.

Let me repeat what I have detailed here before: Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State did not make up sharia law. Islam did. We can keep our heads tucked snug in the sand, or we can recognize the source of the problem.

As I detailed in Spring Fever: The Illusion of Islamic Democracy, the literalist construction of sharia that Islamic supremacists seek to enforce is “literal” precisely because it comes from Islamic scripture, not from some purportedly “extremist” fabrication of Islam. Moreover, this “classical sharia” is enthusiastically endorsedin principle by several of the most influential institutions in the Islamic Middle East, which explains why it is routinely put into practice when Islamists are given — or seize — the opportunity to rule over a territory.

Reliance is not some al-Qaeda or Islamic State pamphlet. It is a renowned explication of sharia’s provisions and their undeniable roots in Muslim scripture. In the English translation, before you get to chapter and verse, there are formal endorsements, including one from the International Institute of Islamic Thought — a U.S.-based Muslim Brotherhood think tank begun in the early Eighties (and to which American administrations of both parties have resorted as an exemplar of “moderation”). Perhaps more significantly, there is also an endorsement from the Islamic Research Academy at al Azhar University, the ancient seat of Sunni learning to which President Obama famously turned to co-sponsor his cloyingly deceptive 2009 speech on relations between Islam and the West.

In their endorsement, the al-Azhar scholars wrote:

We certify that the . . . translation corresponds to the Arabic original and conforms to the practice and faith of the orthodox Sunni Community. . . . There is no objection to printing it and circulating it. . . . May Allah give you success in serving Sacred Knowledge and the religion.

There could be no more coveted stamp of scholarly approval in Islam.

Charlie Hebdo, of course, is in the business of cartoon caricature for satirical purposes. That is a time-honored method of expression, political and otherwise, in the West. That is in stark contrast to how such expression is viewed by Islam. Here, as I summarized in my book Spring Fever – quoted verbatim and supported by citations — is what Reliance has to say about such visual art forms:

It is forbidden to make pictures of “animate life,” for doing so “imitates the creative act of Allah Most High”; “Whoever makes a picture, Allah shall torture him with it on the Day of Judgment until he can breathe life into it, and he will never be able to.” (Reliance w50.0 & ff.)

Nor is visual depiction alone in drawing sharia’s wrath. “Musical instruments of all types are unlawful.” As Reliance elaborates, singing is generally prohibited (for “song makes hypocrisy grow in the heart as water does herbage”), and “on the Day of Resurrection Allah will pour molten lead into the ears of whoever sits listening to a songstress.” There is an exception, though: If unaccompanied by musical instruments, song and poetry drawn from Islamic scripture and encouraging obedience to Allah are permissible. Ironically, although music is generally forbidden, dancing is permissible “unless it is languid, like the movements of the effeminate.” (Reliance r40.0 &ff.)

Understand, the prohibitions just described apply to artistic expression in general; Islam need not be lampooned for caricatures to run afoul of sharia. With that hostile predisposition in mind, let’s now consider Islam’s draconian treatment of expression that renounces Islam, belittles it or, in the slightest way, casts it in an unfavorable light:

Apostasy from Islam is “the ugliest form of unbelief” for which the penalty is death (“When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed”). (Reliance o8.0 & ff.)

Apostasy occurs not only when a Muslim renounces Islam but also, among other things, when a Muslim appears to worship an idol, when he is heard “to speak words that imply unbelief,” when he makes statements that appear to deny or revile Allah or the prophet Mohammed, when he is heard “to deny the obligatory character of something which by consensus of Muslims is part of Islam,” and when he is heard “to be sarcastic about any ruling of the Sacred Law.” (Reliance o8.7; see also p9.0 & ff.)

It is worth pausing to mull these latter prohibitions against denying or reviling any aspect of Islam, Allah, or the prophet. The call to kill apostates for such offensesobviously applies with equal or greater force to non-Muslims, who are pervasively treated far worse than Muslims are by sharia. See, for example, the infamous verse 29 from Sura 9, the Koran’s most bellicose chapter:

Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold forbidden which had been forbidden by Allah and his Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth, from among the people of the book [i.e., Christians and Jews], until they pay the jizya [the poll tax imposed on non-believers for the privilege of living in the Islamic state] and feel themselves subdued.

While insipid Western leaders cannot admonish us often enough that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam,” the French satirical magazine has offered a different take — one rooted in the cherished Western belief that examination in the light of day, rather than willful blindness, is the path to real understanding. In that tradition, a few other choice aspects of sharia, detailed by Muslim scholars in Reliance, are worth reviewing:

“Jihad means to war against non-Muslims.” (Reliance o9.0.)

It is an annual requirement to donate a portion of one’s income to the betterment of the ummah (an obligation called zakat, which is usually, and inaccurately, translated as “charity”); of this annual donation, one-eighth must be given to “those fighting for Allah, meaning people engaged in Islamic military operations for whom no salary has been allotted in the army roster. . . . They are given enough to suffice them for the operation even if they are affluent; of weapons, mounts, clothing and expenses.” (Reliance, h8.1–17.)

As commanded in the aforementioned Sura 9:29, non-Muslims are permitted to live in an Islamic state only if they follow the rules of Islam, pay the non-Muslim poll tax, and comply with various conditions designed to remind them that they have been subdued, such as wearing distinctive clothing, keeping to one side of the street, not being greeted with “Peace be with you” (“as-Salamu alaykum”), not being permitted to build as high as or higher than Muslims, and being forbidden to build new churches, recite prayers aloud, “or make public displays of their funerals or feast-days.” (Reliance o11.0 & ff.)

Offenses committed against Muslims, including murder, are more serious than offenses committed against non-Muslims. (Reliance o1.0 & ff; p2.0-1.)

The penalty for spying against Muslims is death. (Reliance p50.0 & ff; p74.0 & ff.)

The penalty for homosexual activity (“sodomy and lesbianism”) is death. (Reliance p17.0 & ff.)

A Muslim woman may marry only a Muslim man; a Muslim man may marry up to four women, who may be Muslim, Christian, or Jewish (but no apostates from Islam). (Reliance m6.0 & ff. — Marriage.)

A woman is required to be obedient to her husband and is prohibited from leaving the marital home without permission; if permitted to go out, she must conceal her figure or alter it “to a form unlikely to draw looks from men or attract them.” (Reliance p42.0 & ff.)

A non-Muslim may not be awarded custody of a Muslim child. (Reliance m13.2–3.)

A woman has no right of custody of her child from a previous marriage when she remarries “because married life will occupy her with fulfilling the rights of her husband and prevent her from tending to the child.” (Reliance m13.4.)

The penalty for theft is amputation of the right hand. (Reliance o14.0.)

The penalty for accepting interest (“usurious gain”) is death (i.e., to be considered in a state of war against Allah). (Reliance p7.0 & ff.)

The testimony of a woman is worth half that of a man. (Reliance o24.7.)

If a case involves an allegation of fornication (including rape), “then it requires four male witnesses.” (Reliance o24.9.)

The establishment of a caliphate is obligatory, and the caliph must be Muslim and male. “The Prophet . . . said, ‘Men are already destroyed when they obey women.’” (Reliance o25.0 & ff; see also p28.0, on Mohammed’s condemnation of “masculine women and effeminate men.”)

This is not “violent extremist” doctrine. This is Islamic doctrine — sharia, authoritatively explained and endorsed. Millions of Muslims, particularly in the West, do not abide by it and are working heroically — and at great risk to themselves — to marginalize or supersede it. Of course we should admire and help them. That, however, is not a reason to pretend that this doctrine does not exist. It is, furthermore, suicidal to ignore the fact that, because this doctrine is rooted in scripture and endorsed by influential scholars, some Muslims are going to act on it, and many millions more will support them.

This anti-liberty, supremacist, repulsively discriminatory, and sadly mainstream interpretation of Islam must be acknowledged and confronted. In its way, that is what Charlie Hebdo had been attempting to do — while, to their lasting shame, governments in the United States and Europe have been working with Islamist statesto promote sharia blasphemy standards. That needs to end. The future must not belong to those who brutalize free expression in the name of Islam.

— Andrew C. McCarthy is a policy fellow at the National Review Institute. His latest book is Faithless Execution: Building the Political Case for Obama’s Impeachment.

Largest U.S. Muslim Org.: Courted by Gov’t, Dominated by Isalmists

siddiqui2

ISNA shouldn’t be judged by its pleasant media interviews. Its documented history is where the truth can be found.

BY RYAN MAURO:

The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) always denies its Brotherhood connections and says it is “moderate.” Some ISNA officials downplay its origins, insisting that it has charted its own course independent of the Brotherhood. ISNA’s Fiqh Council, its body of scholars, says otherwise.

In 2004, the Chicago Tribune reported that ISNA officials say “Brotherhood members helped form those groups but that their overall influence has been limited.” When ISNA is unable to escape the facts, it downplays them.

The same Islamists that birthed ISNA as a Muslim Brotherhood front lead the organization. A 2009 Hudson Institute study concluded, “All but one of the individuals listed on the ISNA founding documents remain active either in ISNA or one of its affiliated organizations.” The Brotherhood lobby members “continue to exist in their original form.”

To understand ISNA, you must understand that its Islamist orientation requires it to adhere to sharia, or Islamic law. Another word interchangeable with sharia is fiqh. The website, OnIslam.netexplains that “fiqh is our understanding and knowledge of Allah‘s Shari`ah.”

When making decisions, ISNA and other groups look to authoritative scholars of fiqh or sharia. It is these scholars that stand behind the moderate “faces” of ISNA like President Mohamed Magid. If you want to know the true nature of ISNA, you must look at its Fiqh Council of North America.

Of the 17 Fiqh Council officials, 14 have strong Islamist records. That is all but one member of the Executive Council and all but two of the Council members. The remaining members are not necessarily moderate. In fact, their inclusion should be considered a strike against their credentials as “moderates.”

The Executive Council has seven officials. The one without an obviously Islamist track record is Vice Chairman Dr. Zainab Alwani. However, she still has been published by the International Institute of Islamic Thought and Association of Muslim Social Scientists, two U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entities.

Read more at Clarion Project

Muslim Brotherhood, Qatar to Dominate Downtown D.C.

DC city centerBy Ryan Mauro:

An organization linked to the Muslim Brotherhood and the Qatari government is making a $1 billion real estate investment in the hope that the complex will “become the unequivocal centerpiece of Downtown D.C.” Among its features is a Qatari cultural center named Al-Bayt, or “Home.”

The 10-acre project, named CityCenterDC, is an initiative of Qatar Foundation International. According to its website, it is a “U.S.-based member of Qatar Foundation” in Doha. It is also its main financier.

In 2008, the chairperson of the Qatar Foundation and the Qatari Emir established the Al-Qaradawi Research Center. Qaradawi is the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood and vocal supporter of its Palestinian wing, Hamas. He advocates the doctrine of “gradualism;”an incremental and practical strategy to stealthily advance the sharia agenda around the world.

The Research Center’s stated objective is promoting the ideology of Qaradawi, who it describes as a “pioneer of Islamic thought and presently its main theorist.”  He teaches his followers to wage “jihadwith money.”

The Qatar Foundation is also connected to the International Institute of Islamic Thought, a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity. Dr. Jasser Auda, the Deputy Director of the Qatar Foundation’s Center for Islamic Legislation, also teaches for IIIT.

Former U.S. Treasury Department terrorism-financing analyst Jonathan Schanzer explains, “Qatar is the ATM of the Muslim Brotherhood movement and its associated groups.” Qatar has drawn the ire of moderate Muslims for its generous subsidizing of Islamists.

Read more at Clarion Project

The Brotherhood on Campus: Your Tax Dollars at Work

va-shenandoah-450x337Front Page, By :

The National Endowment for the Humanities says it “strengthens our republic by promoting excellence in the humanities.” Apparently, the federal agency believes that funding student outreach by the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity, fits this description.

On October 24, IIIT held an outreach event at Shenandoah University in Winchester, VA with the school’s Muslim Students Association, another group founded by the Muslim Brotherhood.

The IIIT summary states that the program “is offered in cooperation with the National Endowment for the Humanities” and the event is supported by Student Life’s Intercultural Programs, the College of Arts and Sciences and the Alson H. Smith Jr. Library.

The FBI had informants inside the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood network that warned about IIIT’s plan to “institute the Islamic Revolution in the United States” as far back as 1988. A declassified FBI document shows that a spy recalled the leadership “stated that the Muslims in the United States have to be prepared for martyrdom.”

The spy said that IIIT was currently focused on “peacefully get[ting] inside the United States government and also American universities.” Therefore, in this case, IIIT is using a taxpayer-funded federal agency to pursue the objective it has pursued for decades.

1991 U.S. Muslim Brotherhood memo, later seized by the authorities, substantiated the FBI informant’s reporting. The secret document listed IIIT as one of the Brotherhood’s secret fronts as part of its “work in America as a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within.”

Skeptics will point out that 1988 and 1991 were a long time ago, but 2002 isn’t. That’s the year when IIIT’s offices were raided as part of a terrorism-financing investigation. The probe continued until at least 2007 when the U.S. government was pressuring Sami al-Arian, a convicted terrorist, to testify about his strong links to IIIT.

In 1992, the President of IIIT wrote a letter to Sami al-Arian that said, “For us, we deem all of your institutions our own…” The letter discussed IIIT’s financial support of al-Arian’s group.

As recently as 2011, an IIIT official in London was writing articles characterizing the U.S. government and military as terrorists. He accused the U.S. of “killing literally millions of people and setting a dozen of countries on fire” since 2001. That IIIT official, Dr. Jasser Auda, also has links to Sheikh Yousef al-Qaradawi, the terrorism-supporting spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood.

The IIIT website proudly hosts a photo of two of its leaders meeting with then-President Morsi on September 27, 2012 in New York. At that time, Morsi was moving the Brotherhood’s Sharia agenda in Egypt full speed ahead. And, according to the caption beneath the photo, he “welcomed the participation of IIIT in the rerform [sic] of higher education in Egypt.”

To sum it up: The same organization that the Muslim Brotherhood wanted to “reform” education in Egypt is now educating American students with the help of a taxpayer-supported federal agency.

Despite IIIT’s record, it has relationships with American schools around the country. Politicians and professors attend IIIT Iftar dinners and some teachers took part in a recent IIIT summer education program for selected students. One even teaches at the U.S. Naval Academy.

Shenandoah University is just a case study in what IIIT is accomplishing. Dr. Calvin Allen, Dean of its College of Arts and Sciences, signed a Memorandum of Agreement with IIIT so the Brotherhood front could “designate an instructor to co-teach with Dr. Allen a course on Islamic civilization.”

Allen signed the agreement with Jamal Barzinji, IIIT’s Vice President and one of the founding fathers of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood network. In 2003, the authorities searched Barzinji’s residence because he “is not only closely associated with PIJ [Palestinian Islamic Jihad]…but also with Hamas.” Allen also spoke at a IIIT fundraiser on August 24, 2011.

IIIT is just one Islamist group that is building relationships with academia. The Alavi Foundation in New York is a front for the Iranian regime and it has donated to 30 schools in the U.S. and Canada. In addition, it financed over 60 Islamic sites in America and many other non-profit organizations. The Blaze is the only television program to cover the Alavi Foundation’s donations (watch my segment here).

Readers are encouraged to send this article and the Clarion Project’s full profile of IIIT to Shenandoah University. The listed contact for the event is Dean Cal Allen (callen@su.edu). The school can also be contacted at shenuniv@su.edu and 540-665-4500.

The National Endowment for the Humanities can be contacted at info@neh.gov and 202-606-8400. You can also write the agency at 1100 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Washington, D.C., 20506.

Every cent given to a Muslim Brotherhood-linked organization is a cent wasted. American taxpayers need to make their voices heard.