U.S. Islamists Claim Win Over Legislation Banning Funding to Terror-Tied Charity

Did House Speaker Paul Ryan just return a favor to his Islamist donors?

WND, by Leo Hohmann, Sept. 12, 2017:

Rack up a win for the Council on American-Islamic Relations and a network of other U.S. Islamist organizations controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood.

Not only has the Brotherhood thus far managed to avoid the Trump White House designating it a terrorist organization, but its U.S. affiliates still hold enormous sway over the Republican-dominated Congress.

The latest evidence of that fact played out on Capitol Hill last Thursday, in a stunning turn of events that received no coverage from the national media and elicited nary a peep out of the conservative media.

Islamic Relief Worldwide, or IRW, a United Kingdom-based humanitarian relief agency with a U.S. chapter, has received hundreds of thousands of dollars in U.S. federal grants in recent years, including $370,000 for the fiscal years 2015 and 2016. Quite naturally, IRW wants to keep the spigot of federal dollars flowing, despite the charity’s links to the terrorist group Hamas.

U.S. Rep. Ron DeSantis, R-Fla., introduced an amendment to the State and Foreign Operations Appropriations Act that would have banned all federal funding of IRW and its affiliates.

When they got wind of DeSantis’ amendment, CAIR and other Islamist groups blitzed members of Congress with a last-minute lobbying effort to vote against the amendment. House leaders capitulated, withdrawing the amendment last Thursday before it was even brought up for a vote.

As a result, Hamas terrorists will continue to have access to federal tax dollars.

IRW is an Islamist charity that has funneled money to Hamas and has ties to the extremist Muslim Brotherhood, according to the highly respected Islamist Watch project of Daniel Pipes’ Middle East Forum.

The Washington Free Beacon has also reported on the money flow from IRW to Hamas.

House Speaker Paul Ryan has accepted campaign donations from Islamists tied to CAIR.

Ryan on March 30, 2016, accepted a $1,000 check from Asad Malik, former board member of CAIR Michigan. Malik, the president and CEO of hotel company Amerilodge Group, also gave $500 that year to Rep. Mike Bishop, R-Mich., for his re-election campaign, and another $500 to the Michigan Republican Party, according to the Federal Elections Commission.

Islamic Relief Wordwide has a long history of promoting extremist ideology across both America and Europe and claims to have already received $704,662 in taxpayers’ money.

CAIR put out an action alert Sept. 7 for its supporters to call members of Congress and urge them to vote against the DeSantis Amendment.

A 2014 report by the Clarion Project showed multi-level links between IRW and Hamas, and/or with Muslim Brotherhood front groups such as CAIR, the Islamic Circle of North America, the Islamic Society of North America and the Muslim American Society, going back to another infamous Islamic charity organization known as the Holy Land Foundation. The HLF was designated as a terrorist organization and shut down by the U.S. government in December 2001.

History will not look kindly on those in government who indulge in such blatant willful blindness, said Philip Haney, a founding member of the Department of Homeland Security who co-authored the whistleblower book “See Something Say Nothing.”

“We are nearly 10 years past the time when claims of ignorance can be used as an excuse,” Haney said.

Azhar Aziz, current president of the Islamic Society of North America, or ISNA, is the former director of Fund Development for Islamic Relief-USA (a direct subsidiary of IRW).

‘Putting all of us at risk’

“The fact that representatives of CAIR and ISNA, both co-conspirators in the 2008 HLF trial, still have enough influence within the halls of Congress in 2017 to actually stop legislation designed to prevent the funding of yet another Muslim Brotherhood-linked charity organization, shows that members of Congress have abrogated their constitutional duty to protect American citizens from global Islamic terrorism, and put us all at further risk,” Haney said.

Robert Spencer, director of Jihad Watch for the David Horowitz Freedom Center, said nothing was learned from the 2007-08 Holy Land Foundation trial in which several Muslim Brotherhood operatives were sent to prison for their roles in funneling tax-exempt Islamic charitable donations to Hamas terrorists.

“The Obama administration quashed investigations of some of the ‘unindicted co-conspirators,’ notably CAIR,” Spencer told WND. “It was a one-off, and probably most current U.S. representatives have no idea what the Holy Land Foundation was, or that there was a trial, much less the implications of that trial”

What does this say about the current Republican-controlled Congress?

“That they’re an unprincipled gang of self-aggrandizers and clueless narcissists whose only interests are lining their pockets and getting reelected, not confronting hard issues or protecting the American people,” Spencer said. “Incredible disappointment that Trump has changed nothing.”

John Guandolo, former counter-terrorism specialist with the FBI who now works as a consultant to law enforcement with Understanding the Threat, said the news is not surprising. Washington is under the full control of globalists in both parties who consider it a top priority to deny the threat of the global Islamic movement.

Trump avoids mentioning Islam at 9/11 memorial events

He said he and his business partner were in New York for 9/11 ceremonies and was astounded at the concerted effort to conceal who the enemy was that attacked the U.S. that day 16 years ago.

“We were sad to see the president did not even mention this, or Islam, during any of his speeches when discussing the attacks of 9/11/01,” Guandolo told WND in an email Tuesday. “From our perspective, the purge of the current administration is complete.

“Counter-state actors like Paul Ryan, John McCain, Reince Prebius. Herbert McMaster and others have done their work well.”

Stopping this kind of influence over America’s own government is exactly why the Muslim Brotherhood – and its U.S.-based affiliates – should be designated as a terrorist organization, said Haney.

“And it’s why they should be banned from any further influence within America’s social, political and/or law enforcement arenas,” he said. “Other countries have already taken such measures; what are we waiting for, here in the land of the free, and the home of the brave?”

Also see:

Updated Sept. 13: U.S. Rep. Ron DeSantis’s amendment to block money going to Islamic Worldwide was not withdrawn, as it was never formally offered in the first place. “Due to Hurricane Irene (sic), I left Washington on Thursday to help my family and community prepare for the storm,” DeSantis said in a statement. “I was thus unable to offer my amendment, but remain committed to blocking taxpayer funds for organizations with ties to terrorist groups such as Hamas.”

On This September 11th UTT Calls on American Leaders to Do Their Duty

Understanding the Threat, by John Guandolo, Sept. 10, 2017:

It has been 16 years since 19 jihadis from Saudi Arabia flew airplanes into the Twin Towers in New York, the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia, and tried to reach the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C. but failed because of the heroic efforts of American citizens.

Since that day, America has fought and lost two wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, not because of a failure of Marines, soldiers, sailors, or airmen, but because American political and military leaders failed to do their legal duty to KNOW the enemy.

Since that day, many American pastors and rabbis have misinformed their flocks and told them the god of Islam – allah – is the same as the God of Israel and the Father of Jesus the Christ of Nazareth.

Since that day, American political leaders have attacked and derided citizens who speak truthfully about the threat of the Global Islamic Movement, defended known suit-wearing jihadis, and even awarded these “terrorists” for being “helpful” in the “Global War on Terror.”

Since that day, U.S. government analysts across the board have attempted to identify the threat without including Islam in the analysis because Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama told them the threat comes from “Violent Extremism” not from Islam.

Since that day, many American citizens have come to understand the core doctrine of Islam – sharia (Islamic Law) – commands muslims to wage jihad (warfare) until the entire world is under Islamic rule.

Americans are realizing Al Qaeda, ISIS, the Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas, Iran, Saudi Arabia, other Islamic nations and jihadi groups as well as the pinnacle of Islamic jurisprudence – Al Azhar (Egypt) – are all correct in their doctrinal understanding of Islam.

Americans are also coming to realize their leaders are catastrophically clueless about this enemy.

Sixteen years after 9/11/01, the United States government has not identified the threat nor the enemy threat doctrine (sharia), and has no coherent strategy for victory.

If we want to honor the nearly 3,000 Americans who perished on 9/11/01 and all of the servicemen and women killed and wounded in combat, we must not rest until our leaders at the local, state, and federal level do their duty to protect America against “all enemies foreign and domestic” and identify and obliterate the jihadi network in the United States, and all of those Aiding and Abetting them.

To read UTT’s 9/11/2016 blog entitled  “This 9/11 Anniversary is a Call to Action” click HERE

To hear UTT’s Special Edition 9/11/17 Radio Broadcast click HERE and then click “Listen” under “John Guandolo”

To read about UTT President John Guandolo’s 9/11/01 experiences as an FBI Special Agent click HERE

UTT Throwback Thursday: US Government’s Failure to Address Domestic Threat

Understanding the Threat, by John Guandolo, Aug.24, 2017:

Summary

The attacks of 9/11 were conducted against the U.S. homeland with support from the Islamic Movement inside the United States.  The U.S. government’s response to fight on battlefields overseas, while leaders of the U.S. Islamic Movement exclusively provided “advice” to our leaders, led to strategic defeats in Afghanistan and Iraq despite the fact the U.S. military crushed the enemy on the battlefield.

Why?  How did this happen?

The United States lost and is losing this war today because, contrary to U.S. warfighting doctrine, the United States government has failed to identify the enemy we face and the doctrine they use as the basis for why they are fighting.

The enemy clearly articulates that sharia (Islamic Law) is the basis for everything they do.

Now the United States is re-engaging in Afghanistan using some of the same leaders who crafted the losing war strategy in the first place, who still have not defined the enemy, using the same allies who are still our enemies (eg Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, et al), while ignoring the massive jihadi network in the United States, which is the primary front for our enemy in this war.

Then (Post 9/11)

After 9/11, President Bush stated the purpose for our operations in Afghanistan was to “make it more difficult for the terror network to train new recruits and coordinate their evil plans,” and that U.S. military actions are “designed to clear the way for sustained, comprehensive and relentless operations to drive them out and bring them to justice.”

During the entire Bush administration the United States never defined the enemy.  Yet, the administration and all key government agencies were primarily advised by Muslim Brotherhood leaders which led to the United States writing constitutions for Afghanistan and Iraq (2005) creating Islamic Republics under sharia (Islamic Law), thus achieving Al Qaeda’s objectives in those two countries.

That is when we lost the war.

Now (August 2017)

In announcing renewed military operations in Afghanistan, President Trump stated the objectives of this endeavor include:  “Attacking our enemies, obliterating ISIS, crushing Al Qaeda, preventing the Taliban from taking over Afghanistan, and stopping mass terrorist attacks against America before they emerge.”

First, if we kill all ISIS fighters, the Global Islamic Movement will roll on.  This is bigger than merely ISIS, Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

As UTT reported on Monday in its article “US Islamic Movement Enters Final Stage” the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood and its allies INSIDE the United States are experiencing the culmination of six decades of work domestically to overthrow our nation.  At the same time, the State Department is meeting with representatives of Hamas doing business as the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) which raises grave concerns.

Mr. Trump’s original instincts were correct.  He should stick with his gut.  We should not engage in Afghanistan as his National Security Advisor and others recommend.

This is a strategic distraction from the real war here at home.

The pattern we see between the U.S. government response after 9/11 and today are very similar:

9/11:  Jihadis attack the homeland using airliners killing nearly 3,000 Americans.

Response:  U.S. fails to define the enemy in any of its national security documents. U.S. military attacks targets in Afghanistan, while using U.S. Muslim Brotherhood leaders as primary advisors on how to fight the war.

Result:  Strategic loses in Afghanistan and Iraq.  Significant gains for Islamic Movement inside the U.S.

Today: U.S. Islamic Movement in “Final Stage” of its Civilization Jihad using hard-left Marxists as leading edge of their violent actions.

Response:  U.S. fails to define the enemy in any of its national security documents.  National Security Advisor Herbert McMaster demonstrates no knowledge of enemy doctrine (sharia).  U.S. Launches renewed military operations in Afghanistan, while failing to pursue the MB and designate it a terrorist organization.  The U.S. government continues to allow the MB to operate in the open in the United States.

Result:  While the U.S. puts its strategic focus on Afghanistan, the cooperating Islamic and hard-left/Marxist Movements will achieve the intentional outcome of their campaign – increased civil disorder, chaos, and a high likelihood of open civil war.

The Islamic Movement in the United States includes over 3000 Islamic centers/mosques, over 800 Muslim Student Associations (MSA) on every major college/university campus, over 255 Islamic Societies, and many others as has been detailed in previous UTT reports.  Nearly all of the jihadi attacks on the United States in the last 16 years, including the attacks of 9/11, had direct support from this network.

The 9/11 attacks had direct support from Saudi Ambassador Prince Bandar.

Yet, this network remains untouched by the Department of Defense, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Homeland Security.

If the United States government wants to thin the jihadi herd, as the President states is his desire, he can begin with dealing with the mothership of their Movement – the US Council of Muslim Organizations (USCMO) – and jihadi leaders inside America like Nihad Awad, Ibrahim Hooper, Oussama Jamal, Salam al Marayati, Mohamed Magid, Azhar Azeez, Javaid Siddiqi, Sayyid Syeed, Muzammil Siddiqi, and so many others, as well as those aiding and abetting them like the President of the Southern Poverty Law Center Richard Cohen and the entire SPLC, and Congressmen Keith Ellison and Andre Carson.

Silence as ISNA Kicks Out Gay Muslims From Conference

(Photo: From Muslims for Progressive Voices website)

Clarion Project, by Ryan Mauro, Aug. 14, 2017:

If you go into a bomb shelter, close the door and put on headphones, you’ll hear the sound of progressives reacting to how a top Muslim-American group discriminated against pro-LGBT Muslims: Total silence.

The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) shockingly kicked out a pro-LGBT Muslim group named Muslims for Progressive Values from its table at an event in early July. It is now mid-August and not a word about it has been heard.

What should be even more embarrassing for supporters of gay rights is that the Muslim group’s table was jointly reserved by Muslims for Progressive Values and Human Rights Campaign. The latter group describes itself as “the largest LGBT equality-rights advocacy group and political lobbying organization in the United States” with over one million members and supporters.

This isn’t a small incident at a small event with little-known players. All the elements are there for a major story and progressive rallying cry.

The most powerful Muslim-American organization—at the biggest Muslim-American event of the year with over 15,000 attendees—kicked out pro-gay Muslims sharing a table with the largest LGBT advocacy group in the country.

Where are the progressive condemnations, petitions and protesters?

Where are the calls to donate to the afflicted group and other progressive Muslims?

Why haven’t the liberal bloggers and investigative reporters been spurred into action, researching other Islamist groups guilty of demonizing homosexuals?

ISNA hasn’t even been forced to address the incident. Its website has no statement. It did not reply to requests for comments from the few reporters who covered it.

Muslims for Progressive Values (MPV) told reporter Andy Ngo that their table offered pamphlets advocating for equality for women and LGBT when an attendee who was clearly Salafist confronted them.

The table was managed by Frank Parmir, a member of MPV’s Columbus chapter and a representative of the Human Rights Campaign. The Salafist told Parmir that anyone who says homosexuality isn’t a sin cannot be a “real Muslim” — essentially accusing him of apostasy, an offense that qualifies for the death penalty under the theocratic sharia (Islamic) law that Salafists want to create.

At this point, ISNA had a choice: Cater to the intolerant Salafist or embrace freedom of speech and diversity like it claims to believe in. It chose the former.

MPV was then approached by “an invasion of suits.” They were ISNA staff members, including the director of ISNA Conventions, Conferences and Special Projects, Bashara Saleem.

MPV and Human Rights Campaign were then told to leave. The two MPV and Human Rights Campaign representatives met with Saleem and ISNA board director Farhan Syed to make their case.

Parmir summarized the conversation in the following Facebook post:

It soon became apparent that their concern was for MPV’s presence, not HRC. They are glad to affirm HRC’s advocacy of legal rights for sexual minorities. But they are very uncomfortable with MPV’s advocacy of gender equality and LGBTQ inclusion. They were very clear that they are a religious organization. Their value structure has women as secondary to men…at least in ritual leadership. They are not in the least open to MPV’s call for gender equality. And their religious values do not allow any suggestion that members of the LGBTQ community can be Muslim if they are not repentant. They are adamantly opposed to the notion that there is any room in Islam for a conversation about the possibility of any equality of legitimacy between heterosexual intimacy and homosexual intimacy.

I think if HRC had not partnered with MPV, the booth would have been ok. But the dike that divides homophobic Islam from progressive Islam must not be breached. The Dyke dike must remain unpenetrated.

The ISNA officials told Parmir that the pamphlets at the table were “stressful” and “upsetting.”

According to the account given to reporter Andy Ngo by Parmir, ISNA board director Farhan Syed tried to distance himself from appearing anti-gay by claiming that he has homosexual friends who come to his home for dinner—but with one exception: “They’re not Muslim.” For this ISNA official, Muslims shouldn’t even sit down and share a meal and conversation with a self-proclaimed Muslim who is homosexual.

MPV says the ISNA officials explained that its national conference is “a religious, private and family-oriented event” and “we don’t fit in.”

Parmir ends his post with a powerful conclusion:

“Perhaps the great fault in all this is in ISNA’s name. It is not The Islamic Society of North America. It is The Salafi Society of North America. ISNA is not, as its name implies, an umbrella organization for all Islamic communities. It serves only the ones they in their bigotry approve of,” he wrote.

He’s correct. According to the Justice Department, ISNA is an “entity” of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood. It also designated ISNA as an unindicted co-conspirator in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation, another Brotherhood entity that was shut down for financing Hamas. The Holy Land Foundation “operated from within ISNA.”

The president of MPV said, “We’re really sick and tired of the hypocrisy of them (ISNA) claiming to be LGBT allies. They’re only allies when the camera is on.”

MPV also issued a blistering public statement. Here’s an excerpt:

“In the past, ISNA has declared itself to be a proponent of women’s and LGBTQ rights, and in the aftermath of the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando by a self-hating gay Muslim man indoctrinated with homophobic teachings, many ISNA member mosques claimed to be “supportive of LGBTQ rights.” This incident not only puts the spotlight on ISNA and its member mosques’ true policy toward LGBTQ Muslims but also their discriminatory and intolerant version of Islam as a whole.

Without acknowledging the absolute rights of women and LGBTQ Muslims and of the diversity of Muslims, ISNA cannot continue to claim to represent North American Muslims. When misogynistic and homophobic teachings in Islam are often used to demonize Muslims and Islam, ISNA’s policy and theology of intolerance only adds fodder to our adversaries.”

Parmir’s Facebook post was positively received by some Muslim readers. One Muslim provided links to articles documenting Saudi financing of ISNA. Another wrote (lightly edited to fix grammatical issues):

“ISNA are pure orthodox Salafi, although they hide themselves as being mainstream Sunni, which they are not. Their funding sources don’t allow them to welcome MPV or be close to them. My personal experience at this location confirms that their ideology of Shariah is pretty orthodox and close to the Saudi ideology of Shariah which I oppose.”

The Muslim author wrote that his personal experience with ISNA was from 2003-2004. Another commentator with direct experience in dealing with ISNA wrote:

“I’m also conflicted. I joined the ACLU and ISNA the day after 45 [Trump] was elected. That was about legal protection for myself and others. ISNA represents themselves as agreeing with U.S. civil rights laws but…clearly they aren’t interested in that process happening within Islam.”

The contradiction between ISNA’s public presentation and substantive actions is also apparent when you look at who they give a platform to. Its events have a long list of speakers but none from MPV or, for that matter, groups like the Muslim Reform Movement.

ISNA cannot hide behind the excuse that MPV is too small to be featured. Its last annual report shows that it is very active. Politicon, known as the Comic-Con for political nerds, found them to be prominent enough to be featured on a panel.

Although some of the resources recommended by MPV are concerning (like Tariq Ramadan), the organization is still acknowledging and tackling the issue of sharia law. It has a lecture series that “seeks to dismantle the religious justification for homophobia in Muslim communities with medical, social and religious history.”

Instead of at least including MPV’s voice, ISNA’s July convention had radical speakers like Muzammil Siddiqi, who said in 2001 that he supports the execution of homosexuals by governments based on sharia law (but opposes attacks on gays by individuals).

Siddiqi was the president of ISNA from 1996 to 2000, remains on ISNA’s Majilis Ash-Shura council and is the chairman of the extremist Fiqh Council of North America.

He got his Islamic credentials at a Saudi university and remains a member of the Supreme Council of Mosques in Mecca and an executive board member of the International Assembly of the Council of Ulama in Mecca. He’s part of the Saudi Salafist/Wahhabist infrastructure. And it shows in his comments on executing gays.

Instead of speaking out against ISNA, many progressive commentators on these issues are acting as pitbulls for ISNA and similar groups by labeling their detractors as bigoted “Islamophobes.” They are defending groups like Muslims of America and its “Islamberg” headquarters who demonize the LGBT community.

So, again, where are the progressives? It’s time for genuine, consistent progressives to get involved and call out the Regressive Left that abandons progressive values in order to whitewash Islamists.

Civilization Jihad at Upstate New York’s Chautauqua Institution

Understanding the Threat, by John Guandolo, July 31, 2017:

The Chautauqua Institution, a non-profit educational center “originally the Chautauqua Lake Sunday School Assembly, was founded in 1874 as an educational experiment in out-of-school, vacation learning,” according to its website.  Chautauqua supports theatre programs, debates on “The Suffrage,” hosts concerts with acts like Sheryl Crow, and is a significant driver for the Muslim Brotherhood’s jihadi Movement in the United States.

The major overtaking of Chautauqua by jihadis was led by Reverend Joan Brown Campbell, the Director of the Department of Religion at the Chautauqua Institution, and the first female to serve as the General Secretary of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA (NCC) and as Director of the US Office of the World Council of Churches (WCC).

As those who follow UTT know, the National Council of Churches (NCC) in the United States has long defended and advocated for terrorist/jihadi organizations, including many of the Muslim Brotherhood front groups.  The World Council of Churches has publicly called for Israel to release Hamas terrorists.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s stated method to overthrow the United States government and replace it with an Islamic State is “Civilization Jihad by OUR hands.”  They get our leaders in the religious, political, military, law enforcement, media, intelligence, educational, and business communities to do their bidding for them.

And that is just what Reverend Joan Brown Campbell and the leaders of Chautauqua have done since 2002 – right after 9/11.

Reverend Campbell brought Karen Armstrong to Chautauqua Institution, which opened the doors of Chautauqua wide to Saudi Arabia, the Muslim Brotherhood, and jihadis from all over the planet.  Armstrong is a former Catholic nun who defends jihadi martyrdom operations (“suicide bomber), advocates for jihadis, and blames 9/11 on United States and the West in general.  She works closely with numerous MB leaders around the globe.

Jihadi/Terrorist defender and advocate Karen Armstrong speaking at Chautauqua Institution

The Family of Abraham/Abrahamic programs, brought to Chautauqua by Armstrong and her jihadi allies, are Muslim Brotherhood operations which perpetuate the lie that Christianity, Judaism, and Islam are three Abrahamic faiths which worship the same God.  They never discuss the doctrinal components of Islam – which are the core of Islam – which call for the killing or subjugation of all non-muslims under sharia, nor do they mention that core Islamic doctrine teaches Jesus will return at the end of days and cast all Christians into hell for not converting to Islam and will slaughter all the Jews for being Jews (Bukhari 2222: Book 34, Hadith 169)

Imam Feisal Rauf at the Chautauqua Institution

Since 2002, thanks to Karen Armstrong with support from Reverend Campbell, Chautauqua has hosted senior Muslim Brotherhood jurist Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf each summer.  Rauf is the man behind the drive to build a mosque/Islamic Center at the site of the 9/11 attack in New York City through his Park 51 and Cordoba Initiative projects.  He is also a sharia scholar whose book, Islam: A Sacred Law, reads like an ISIS publication, stating the purpose of Islam is to establish an Islamic State under sharia.

Abdul Malik Mujahid speaking at Chautauqua Institution

 

ISNA’s (Hamas funder) Sayyid Syeed speaking at Chautauqua

Other suit-wearing jihadis Chautauqua brings in include:  Abdul Malik Mujahid, listed as one of the world’s 500 most influential muslims (2011-2015), is a former President of the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) which was identified as a part of the Muslim Brotherhood Movement by the Department of Justice in the largest terrorism financing and Hamas trial ever successfully prosecuted in U.S. history (US v Holy Land Foundation, Dallas, 2008).  He is also the six time Board chair of the Parliament of the World’s Religions and former Chairman of Hamas’ front organization the Council of the Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago (CIOGC).  Sayyid Syeed, the National Director for Interfaith outreach for the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA).  ISNA was identified by the Department of Justice as a Muslim Brotherhood organization which directly funds the terrorist group Hamas, and whose stated goal is to wage “Civilization Jihad” in the United States to overthrow our government and replace it with an Islamic State; Dalia Mogahed, a leading female in the Muslim Brotherhood’s Islamic Movement who works with several MB/Hamas organizations like the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) and others; Khalid Qazi, the founding Director of the Western New York chapter of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC); and many others including Sulayman Nyang, Dr. Laila Al-Marayati, and Eboo Patel.

Dalia Mogahed speaking at Chautauqua Institution

Khalid Qazi speaking at the Chautauqua Institution

This entire Muslim Brotherhood Chautauqua operation supported by John Esposito, the Director of the Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim and Christian Understanding at the formerly Catholic Georgetown University.  Alwaleed bin Talal is a Saudi prince and one of the richest men in the world, who personally funds terrorists and Muslim Brotherhood operations – but I repeat myself.  John Esposito at Georgetown University is a close colleague of bin Talal, defends jihadis and Islam, and continues to act a an agent of Saudi Arabia, a foreign power. FARA alert.

NY Mayor Rudy Giuliani rejects $10 million check from Prince Alwaleed bin Talal because of his connections to terrorism

For 15 years, Chautauqua Institution has been the conduit for a successful Muslim Brotherhood Information Operation which has given the tens of thousands of people who attend their 9-week and individual programs a counter-factual understanding of Islam and the intentions of the Muslim Brotherhood.

This is a tremendously successful operation for our enemy.

Remember, this is Information Warfare.  This war is about propaganda and political influence operations. Its more about counterintelligence and espionage than it is about “terrorism.”

Just ask Congress about their IT penetration by muslims.

What can you do besides sit there, read this, and get angry?

  1. Ensure your church, pastor, and religious community is not involved in the Chautauqua Institution, the National Council of Churches, nor the World Council of Churches.
  2. Utilize UTT’s training programs for Churches and communities to ensure your pastor and church leaders do not unwittingly become tools for America’s enemies like the Chautauqua Institution.
  3. Contact the Department of Justice’s Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA) office and give them the names of Karen Armstrong, John Esposito, Joan Brown Campbell, and others you believe are agents acting on behalf of a foreign power.
  4. Use social media to ask Sheryl Crow why she performed at a venue that supports terrorists, and see what other acts are coming to Chautauqua Institution soon and ask them the same thing.
  5. Utilize the resources available at http://www.UnderstandingtheThreat.com and deepen your understanding of the threat to America from the Islamic Movement.

Remember, the best-dressed and “nicest” muslim in the room, is the most dangerous.

UTT Throwback Thursday: ISNA Was and Is a Jihadi Organization

Understanding the Threat, by John Guandolo, July 20, 2017:

In 1963, the first US-based national Islamic organization – the Muslim Students Association (MSA) – was created by the Muslim Brotherhood at the University of Illinois, Urbana.

 

In the early 1980’s the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood created the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) as the next generation of the MSA – headquartered in Plainfield, Indiana – as the “nucleus” of their Islamic Movement to lead and coordinate all of the U.S. MB organizations created over those first 20 years.

The Fiqh Council of North America ensures the MB is compliant with sharia and their own website confirms ISNA’s relationship to MSA

In November 2001, the largest Islamic charity in America – the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) – was indicted by the U.S. government after a 15 year FBI investigation and convicted in 2008 in the largest terrorism financing and Hamas trial ever successfully prosecuted in American history for funneling millions of dollars to the terrorist group Hamas.

HLF was the largest Islamic charity in America and it was a terrorist organization.  Specifically, it was a Hamas front.  Hamas is an inherent part of the Muslim Brotherhood.  Hamas is essentially the Palestinian MB, and is a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization per the U.S. government and several other governments.

In the HLF trial, ISNA is:  a named un-indicted co-conspirator; identified as a Muslim Brotherhood organization by the Department of Justice; and was identified as a funding source for Hamas.  Monies went directly from ISNA’s accounts to Hamas leaders and organizations overseas.

ISNA directly funds terrorists.

Yesterday, it was revealed the Canadian government pulled the charitable status from ISNA Islamic Services of Canada as well as another Muslim Brotherhood group – the Canadian Islamic Trust Foundation. The two groups lost their charitable status for providing money to the Relief Organization of Kashmiri Muslims (ROKM), which is a charitable arm of Jamaat-e-Islami, a jihadi group.

Four years ago, Canada revoked the charitable status for the ISNA Development Foundation for funding Pakistani jihadis in the Kashmir region.

ISNA is the largest Islamic organization in North America and, coincidentally, the largest Muslim Brotherhood organization in North America.  The MB’s own documents identify it as the “nucleus” of their Movement here.  The Department of Justice identifies ISNA as a Muslim Brotherhood organization funding the terrorist group Hamas.

Up until recently ISNA was involved in certifying Muslim chaplains for the Department of Defense and Bureau of Prisons.  Under the Obama administration, ISNA’s previous President Mohamed Magid:  sat on the Homeland Security Advisory Committee and held a secret clearance; gave lectures at CIA headquarters; was given an award by the FBI’s Washington Field Office (2005); was given the FBI Director’s Award by Director Comey in 2016; worked, along with his senior directors, directly with several Secretaries of State, including Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Kerry; was publicly lauded by President Obama’s Deputy National Security Advisor/Chief of Staff Denis McDonough; was publicly praised by President Obama who made a congratulatory video for ISNA’s annual conference two years ago; and participated in President Trump’s Inaugural Prayer Service at the National Cathedral (see UTT’s video of that HERE).

Former ISNA President Imam Mohamed Magid (r) with President Obama an others

ISNA President Mohamed Magid receives an award from FBI SAC (Washington, DC) Mike Rolince

Today, ISNA’s National Director Sayyid Syeed (from Kashmiri, India by the way) can be found walking the halls of Congress, meeting with national Christian and Jewish leaders, and helping drive the Muslim Brotherhood’s Civilization Jihad as far as he can.

Pastor Scott Prouty (1st Presbyterian Church, Redwood Falls, MN) & ISNA Director Sayyid Syeed

“Interfaith Outreach” with Sayyid Syeed (L) & Former Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres

Sayyid Syeed with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton

Remember, the MB’s stated objectives – per their by-laws – is to establish an Islamic State under sharia. This is the same goal as ISIS, Al Qaeda, and all the other Islamic “terrorist” groups in the world.

ISNA has over 300 subsidiary Islamic Societies in the U.S. today that are necessarily hostile to the communities in which they exist.

At least ISNA-Canada is honest about their true intent.  Their website defines their mission as:  “Building an Islamic way of life in North America.”

Despite what they say, ISNA-Canada is directly aligned with the ISNA offices in the United States.  In case you missed it, they are the Islamic Society of North America.

Everyone who swears an oath to support and defend the United States Constitution has a legal and moral duty to oppose and shut down ISNA’s efforts by all means necessary.

Linda Sarsour’s ‘jihad against Donald Trump’ is what it sounds like

While Sarsour may not be personally calling for violence, she can hardly be unaware of doctrinal connotations her words carry, and these connotations would be unmistakably understood by her ISNA audience or indeed anyone who has an accurate understanding of the legal understanding of jihad within Islamic law. (AP Photo/Henny Ray Abrams, File)

Washington Examiner, by Kyle Shideler | Jul 7, 2017

There’s yet another controversy involving New York-based Islamist and current Democratic cause célèbre Linda Sarsour. The poster child for the Women’s March who wished to “take away the vagina” from female genital mutilation victim, reformer and author Ayaan Hirsi Ali caught the attention of conservative journalists when she issued what appeared to be a call for jihad from the podium of the Islamic Society of North America’s annual convention.

“I hope, that when we stand up to those who oppress our communities, that Allah accepts from us that as a form of jihad. We are struggling against tyrants and rulers not only abroad in the Middle East but here in the United States of America, where you have fascists and white supremacists and Islamophobes reigning in the White House.”

Countless media outlets on the left (and a handful on the right) rushed to Sarsour’s defense, allegedly claiming that conservatives took the comments out of context. In particularly they note Sarsour’s decision to cite a hadith — a documented statement by Islam’s founder Mohammed — which describes speaking truth to a tyrant as the “best form of jihad.”

It’s true that Sarsour did preface her use of the word “jihad” in this way. But it’s Sarsour’s defenders, not her critics, that are taking the speech out of its wider context.

To begin with, consider on whose platform Sarsour was speaking. Sarsour was speaking before the annual convention of a group about which a federal judge ruled, “The government has provided ample evidence to establish” their association with the Muslim Brotherhood and its terrorist organization Hamas. Among that evidence was the fact that ISNA’s subsidiary shared a bank account with the now-convicted Holy Land Foundation, an account that issued checks to Hamas Deputy Chairman Mousa Abu Marzook.

Far from shunning ISNA’s Muslim Brotherhood history, Sarsour overtly endorsed it. Sarsour was speaking as the keynote speaker at a luncheon honoring Dr. Sayyid Syeed, whom Sarsour praised for his role in “the infrastructure you have built for all of us.” That infrastructure can only refer to Syeed’s role in numerous Muslim American organizations, almost all of which have been identified by documents submitted as evidence in federal court as Muslim Brotherhood organizations or fronts.

Thus it cannot be ignored that Sarsour is speaking before a pro-Muslim Brotherhood audience. Given the Brotherhood’s own motto that “Jihad is our way, and dying for the sake of Allah is our highest hope,” it’s hard to believe that among this crowd the invocation of jihad doesn’t carry with it recognition of its violent meaning.

Sarsour added to this context by lauding a man she described as her “mentor,” Sirraj Wahhaj. Wahhaj, for those who do not follow U.S. counterterrorism history, is notable for his role as an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Wahhaj also testified as a character witness for “Blind Sheikh” Omar Abdel Rahman, whose leadership of the 1993 WTC bombing cell would earn him a conviction for seditious conspiracy to overthrow the U.S. government.

Sarsour has said she is seeking to emulate Wahhaj, whose own views on jihad are perfectly clear. Wahhaj has even raised funds for groups now designated for financing al Qaeda.

Like Wahhaj, Sarsour couches her speech in the language of responding to “oppressors.” Indeed, oppressors and oppression are the common language that binds Sarsour’s speech together. This is highly significant since the topic, combating oppression, carries with it clear connotations within Islamic legal doctrine on jihad.

Consider a fatwa published on IslamOnline, a website established by Muslim Brotherhood chief jurist Yusuf Al Qaradawi. After noting that there are “various kinds” of jihad, including “jihad against oneself” and “jihad against Satan,” the spiritual sorts of struggles that Sarsour’s defenders are attempting to invoke, the text raises the question of “oppression.”

The fatwa notes, “Jihad against the leaders of oppression and innovation is of three kinds: jihad with one’s hand (i.e., physical jihad, fighting) if one is able. If that is not possible, then it should be with one’s tongue (i.e., by speaking out). If that is not possible, then it should be with one’s heart (i.e., by hating the evil and feeling that it is wrong).” [Emphasis mine]

This view is shared in the 14th century manual of Islamic law known as The Reliance of the Traveller by Shafi’i scholar Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri. Reliance is a useful choice since it was certified by the ISNA-affiliated Fiqh Council of North America, alongside many other Islamic scholars from various nations.

Reliance notes, under its index for “Oppressors, Fighting, as part of faith (iman)” [p.75.4(2)]:

“in the hadith related by Muslim concerning oppressors, [meaning Sahih Muslim, understood as the second-most authoritative compilation of hadith]:
(2) ‘Whoever fights them with his hand is a believer, whoever fights them with his tongue is a believer, whoever fights them in his heart, is a believer.”

In other words, Sarsour’s invocation of jihad of the tongue is viewed in traditional Islamic doctrine as not in opposition to violent jihad (i.e. fighting) but rather as explicitly complementary to it.

While Sarsour may not be personally calling for violence, she can hardly be unaware of doctrinal connotations her words carry, and these connotations would be unmistakably understood by her ISNA audience or indeed anyone who has an accurate understanding of the legal understanding of jihad within Islamic law.

People defending Sarsour’s words simply don’t know what she’s talking about.

Kyle Shideler is Director of the Threat Information Office at the Center for Security Policy. 

Also see:

***