McCain Claims Syria Won’t Turn Al Qaeda Because of High Literacy Rate

McCain_RazanBy :

Retirement. It can’t come too soon.

Sen. John McCain angrily disputed claims that at least half of Syria’s rebels are Islamic extremists on Tuesday night.

“Not true, not true!” the Arizona Republican said to an audience member during a discussion hosted by the Council on Foreign Relations, the Daily Caller reports. “There’s about 70 percent still who are Free Syrian Army.”

Much of the Free Syrian Army consists of people barely distinguishable from Al Qaeda. That is what the study documented. McCain is rigidly sticking to the FSA tag as some kind of certification of moderation while ignoring all evidence to the contrary.

Mr. McCain said it’s a “cop-out” for critics of intervention in Syria to say “we don’t know who they are.”

“The point, I think, that you and others are missing … [is that] Syria is a moderate nation. Syria has the highest literacy rate of any nation in the Middle East. They are not going to submit to a jihadis or al Qaeda group governing them. They will not.”

If there’s any proof that McCain isn’t just wrong, but has become completely incompetent to even discuss the topic, here it is. Studies have repeatedly shown that Jihadists are drawn from the middle and even upper classes.

High literacy rates is not an obstacle to terrorist involvement. It increases the probability of Islamist interests.

Assuming you can even trust the literacy rate coming out of Syria, it’s 79 percent. (If you want a reason to distrust self-reported literacy rates, Russia’s is 99 percent)

Iran’s literacy rate is 77 percent. Is that 2 percent really all the difference between being susceptible to a totalitarian Islamic regime or not?

For that matter, Turkey’s literacy rate is 95 percent (again, unrealistic) and yet it’s governed by an Islamist thug whose backers claim he’s warding of telekinesis attack plots.

Finally there’s Jordan. Jordan is the Muslim country with some of the highest rates of approval for Al Qaeda. In 2006, 61 percent of Jordanians liked Al Qaeda. (Then Al Qaeda in Iraq started bombing them and his approval ratings fell a whole lot.)

Jordan also has a literacy rate of 93.4%.

Finally, if we’re going to look at terror states, let’s hop over to the Palestinian Authority which is supposedly at 92%. 37% poll as supporting Islamic fundamentalism. (36% in Jordan, also known as Palestine 1.0)

Finally Pakistan claims a literacy rate of 79%. That ties Syria.

And we know therefore that Pakistan is a “moderate” nation that could never be taken over by “extremists”. Just ask Senator McCain. Assuming he can read.

Meet the Syrian Islamist Organization Controlling Senator McCain’s Agenda

Mouaz-Moustafa-450x193By :

A few days ago, the Wall Street Journal ran a high profile article from one Elizabeth O’Bagy arguing that the majority of the Syrian rebels were actually moderates.

Senator McCain mentioned Elizabeth O’Bagy’s op-ed during the Senate hearings, when he wasn’t playing poker, and tweeted it. That should come as no surprise, considering that O’Bagy is credited with arranging McCain’s infamous photo op with the Syrian rebel leadership.

The Wall Street Journal lists O’Bagy’s role as the Institute for the Study of War. It leaves out the fact that she is the political director for the Syrian Emergency Task Force making her an activist.

O’Bagy doesn’t matter much. She’s a friendly Western face plastered over a foreign organization. Of more interest is Mouaz Moustafa, the smiling man in the Keffiyah on the far right of McCain in this photo.

Mouaz Moustafa is a Palestinian Arab and the Executive Director of the Syrian Emergency Task Force which arranged for McCain’s visit.

Senator McCain called Moustafa a “patriot”, but it’s not clear which country he’s a patriot of, since it’s not Mouaz Moustafa’s first time around on the regime change bus tour.

Before the Syrian Emergency Task Force, Moustafa was the Executive Director of the Libyan Council of North America, which like the SETF existed to help push regime change. Before that, he mentions working with “rebels” in Egypt. On his Twitter feed, he denounces the overthrow of Morsi making it rather clear which side he was on.

His Twitter account frequently features anti-Israel material, including calls for a Palestinian state with its capital in Jerusalem. On his YouTube account, he “liked” a video featuring Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, “crying while praying”.

He also Favorited an anti-Israel video from a channel titled “JewsExposed”

Predating his international period, Mouaz Moustafa did stints as a Field Organizer for the Democratic National Committee and a senate staffer. On Instagram, he calls himself a Freelance Revolutionary.

Mouaz Moustafa, patriot of four countries, none of which is the United States, appears to be holding McCain’s hand on Syria through the Syrian Emergency Task Force. And the Syrian Emergency Task Force appears to be funded by “prominent” Syrians in the United States. It’s not technically a foreign organization. Technically.

Read more at Front Page


John McCain and ‘Allahu Akbar’

john_mccain_syria_visitBy Robert Spencer:

Tuesday morning, Senator John McCain (R-AZ) got a bit hot under the collar when Brian Kilmeade of Fox News noted that the Syrian rebels whom Barack Obama and McCain want to aid militarily were shouting “Allahu akbar! Allahu akbar!” as rockets hit Syrian government offices. McCain’s response to Kilmeade demonstrated not only his ignorance of Islam, but his abysmal misjudgment of what is happening in Syria. And on the basis of that ignorance, he is aiding Obama’s rush to yet another war.

“I have a problem,” Kilmeade said, “helping those people screaming that after a hit.” That incensed McCain, who shot back: “Would you have a problem with an American or Christians saying ‘thank God? Thank God?’ That’s what they’re saying. Come on! Of course they’re Muslims, but they’re moderates and I guarantee you they are moderates.”

Wrong on all counts. In the first place, it does not mean “thank God,” as McCain seems to have affirmed when he said, “That’s what they’re saying.” Allahu akbar means “Allah is greater” – not, as it is often translated, “God is great.” The significance of this is enormous, as it is essentially a proclamation of superiority and supremacism. Allah is greater – than any of the gods of the infidels, and Islam is superior to all other religions. states this obliquely: “Allahu akbar implies that God is superior to all tangible and intangible, temporal and celestial beings.” This may seem to be an innocuous theological statement until one recalls that Islam has always had a political aspect, and Islamic jihadists always shout “Allahu akbar” when attacking infidels. It is a declaration of the superiority of their god and their way of life over those of their victims. 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta also stated that it was meant to make the infidels afraid. He wrote instructions to jihadists that were found in his baggage: “Shout, ‘Allahu Akbar,’ because this strikes fear in the hearts of the non-believers.”

In equating this war cry, which we recently saw Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood members shouting as they destroyed a church and tore off its cross, with “thank God,” McCain was manifesting the moral equivalence that is not only fashionable these days, but required for acceptance into polite society. Only wretched “Islamophobes” don’t accept the mainstream media and government dogma that Christianity is just as likely as Islam to incite its adherents to violence. That there aren’t any Christians anywhere shouting “thank God” as they fire rockets at anyone doesn’t deter McCain from making this equivalence. Religious dogmas, and that’s what the idea that Christianity and Islam are equally violent is, are not subject to the same standards of evidentiary proof as are more mundane realities.

And he guarantees that the Syrian rebels are moderates? This is the John McCain who, according to Lebanon’s Daily Star, “was unwittingly photographed with a known affiliate of the rebel group responsible for the kidnapping of 11 Lebanese Shiite pilgrims one year ago, during a brief and highly publicized visit inside Syria” in May.

Read more at PJ Media



John McCain: America’s Staunchest Supporter of Radical Islam?



If there was still any doubt that America’s leadership is in bed with the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamists in general, Senators John McCain’s and Lindsay Graham’s recent visit to Egypt has singlehandedly removed it, first and foremost among Egyptians themselves, leading to much criticism.  A top media advisor to Egypt’s interim president accused McCain of distorting facts around to the benefit of the Brotherhood, dismissing he remarks as “irrational,” or, more colloquially, “moronic.”    The leader of the youth movement, Tamarod (or “Rebellion” against the Brotherhood) which played a great role in mobilizing Egypt’s millions to launch the June 30 Revolution said “We reject John McCain and call on the international community to let the [Egyptian] people decide their own fate.”  Other Egyptians, likeAhmed al-Zind, head of the Egyptian Judge Club,  have gone as far as to call for the arrest and trial of john McCain for trying to destroy Egypt.

Only when one considers the pro-Brotherhood words and deeds of John McCain in the last few days in Egypt can one begin to understand why he has earned the ire of millions Egyptians-from the military and interim government, to the average Egyptian-setting U.S-Egypt relations that much further back, and all for the sake of the Brotherhood.  As one incensed TV commentator asserted, “These two men have made bolder demands than the Brotherhood-Morsi, Shatter, Badie-themselves!”

First, McCain still insists on calling the June 30 Revolution-which saw many millions of Egyptians take to the streets to call for the ouster of the Brotherhood-a military coup.  Either McCain doesn’t want to accept reality, or, like many Americans, he’s been fed a very false reality, one manufactured by Al Jazeera and promulgated by Anne Patterson, a false reality that claims most Egyptians are for Morsi and that the military simply overthrew him against the popular will.  Al Jazeera has gone so far as portraying images of millions of anti-Morsi protesters as pro-Morsi protesters (and picked up and disseminated by Western media).  Several Al Jazeera correspondents have even resigned because Al Jazeera wantonly reneged on journalism’s code of ethics in order to become the Brotherhood’s international mouthpiece.

Incidentally, if McCain considers the ouster of an Islamist government as a military coup, why doesn’t he extend that distinction to Mubarak’s more moderate government, which was also removed by the military in response to popular protests?  If one argues that Morsi was democratically elected and Mubarak wasn’t, then why was the U.S. giving Egypt billions in aid for all those years, which legitimized Mubarak’s government no less than Morsi’s?  Even the Obama administration has been sensible enough not to call the June 30 revolution a coup and even distanced itself from McCain’s remarks-only to be attacked by the unhinged McCain, who condemned John Kerry’s comment that “the military did not take over.”  On the other hand, McCain praised Bill Burns, Syria’s former U.S. ambassador, who has been accused of playing an important role in empowering the jihadis against the Syrian government, and is set to become the new ambassador to Egypt.  About him, McCain said that “as far as Bill Burns, I have great confidence in him and the work that he does.”

Then there’s McCain’s insistence that all arrested Brotherhood members and other Islamists be released.  He seems to overlook the fact that Brotherhood leadership, beginning with Muhammad Morsi, are under arrest and awaiting trial due to some very serious charges, from inciting terrorism and causing the murder of Egyptians, to grand treason and conspiring with foreign powers against Egypt’s interests.  If McCain was simply interested in the human rights of the incarcerated Brotherhood members, as he claims, one wonders why he and the U.S. administration have been incredibly silent about the fate of Hosni Mubarak, America’s closest Mideast ally for three decades.  If anything, Morsi is facing much more serious charges than Mubarak, yet here is McCain calling for his release while ignoring the “human rights” of the other.

If anything, McCain’s call to release Brotherhood leadership only validates the widespread belief in Egypt that America’s leadership are fellow conspirators with the Brotherhood, fearful that if Morsi and others do stand trial, any number of ugly revelations-ties, conspiracies, the exchange of billions of dollars and Sinai-would be made.   In other words, the fear is that, if the Brotherhood is tried, they will spill the beans as to the nature of their cozy relationship with the U.S. government.

Similarly, McCain personally checked up on Khairat al-Shatter, the deputy chief of the Muslim Brotherhood, currently incarcerated on charges of treason.  Interestingly, Shatter wasn’t even a member of Morsi’s government, begging the question: why is McCain interested in a civilian-one who also happens to be a pivotal figure in the largest Islamist organization in the world?  Even Shatter himself, understanding how bad it looked, asked the senators to go visit and speak to Muhammad Morsi instead.  Of course, the administration’s ties to Khaiarat al-Shatter, the multi-millionaire Islamist, is well known among Egyptians-ambassador Anne Patterson was frequently seen going to and fro from the residence of this “civilian”-and McCain’s visit only further validated this unholy tie in Egypt’s mind.

Numerous Egyptian commentators have also pointed out that McCain repeatedly dodged critical questions by Egyptian journalists present at the conference.  For example, when asked about the fact that the Brotherhood in Rab’a was armed and killing and with the aid of al-Qaeda creating terror in Egypt, McCain ignored the question.  This, of course is in keeping with the fact that McCain also has no answer to the question as to why he is also the staunchest supporter of the jihad in Syria, which has torn the nation apart, seen the slaughter and displacement of untold thousands of Christians, and the destruction of their churches, by foreign jihadis whom McCain is in favor of arming.

Read more: Family Security Matters 

Clinton acknowledges ‘spreading jihadist threat’

Hillary Rodham ClintonBY:

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton sparred with lawmakers Wednesday over what they claimed was the Obama administration’s bungled response to the September 11, 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya.

Clinton became visibly irritated several times as she rebutted claims by Republican senators that the Obama administration intentionally misled the American public about the specific events that led to the deaths of four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens.

Sen. John McCain (R., Ariz.) told Clinton that her response to lawmakers was not up to par.

“The answers your given this morning frankly are not satisfactory to me,” McCain said, chiding Clinton for failing to account for the administration’s lapses in knowledge.

“Were you and the president made aware of the classified cable from chris stevens that said that the united states consulate in Benghazi could not survive a sustained assault,” McCain asked. “Numerous warnings, including personally to me about the security were unanswered, or unaddressed.”

“What was the president’s activities during that seven-hour period?” McCain added, pressing for details. “On the anniversary of the worst attack in American history, September 11th we didn’t have Department of Defense forces available for seven hours.”

McCain went on to reprimand Clinton for arguing that it makes no difference whether the Benghazi compound was stormed by armed militants or attacked by protestors.

“I categorically reject your answer to Senator [Ron] Johnson about, well we didn’t ask these survivors who were flown to Ramstein [air base] the next day, that they—that this was not a spontaneous demonstration,” McCain said. “To say it’s because an investigation was going on? The American people deserve to know answers, and they certainly don’t deserve false answers.”

The American people were deceived, McCain maintained.

“Answers that were given to the American people on September 15th by the ambassador to the United Nations [Susan Rice] were false—in fact contradicted by the classified information which was kept out of the Secretary to the United Nations report who by the way in the president’s words had nothing to do with Benghazi, which questions why she was sent out to start with,” McCain said.

“Why do we care? Because if the classified information had been included it gives an entirely different version of events to the American people,” McCain continued. “If you want to go out and tell the American people what happened you should at least have interviewed the people who were there, instead of saying, ‘No we couldn’t talk to them because a FBI investigation was going on.’ ”

“The American people, and the families of these four brave Americans still have not got gotten the answers that they deserve,” McCain said. “I hope that they will get them.”

Clinton warned that America faces a “spreading jihadist threat” that is endangering U.S. assets across the globe.

Clinton became the latest in a series of high-ranking U.S. government officials to publicly recognize the immediate threat that terrorist forces pose to U.S. embassies and other American outposts in the Middle East and North Africa.

“We now face a spreading jihadist threat,” Clinton said. “We have driven a lot of the operatives out of Afghanistan, Pakistan, killed a lot of them, including [Osama] Bin Laden.”

“But this is a global movement,” Clinton said. “We can kill leaders, but until we help establish strong democratic institutions, until we do a better job with values and relationships, we will be faced with this level of instability.”

Read more at Free Beacon

Andrew McCarthy skewers John McCain and makes the case for questioning Huma Abedin’s security clearance

Questions about Huma Abedin

By Andrew C. McCarthy

Der Spiegel pointed out the obvious: “A certain role of the Muslim Brotherhood in the transition process [to ‘democracy’] in Egypt seems acceptable to the Obama White House.” It was early February 2011, the moment when the uprising that would oust Hosni Mubarak was bubbling over in Tahrir Square. The prominent German newsmagazine figured, who better to ask about the Muslim Brotherhood than the American political establishment’s resident foreign-policy genius, John McCain?

So, the reporter asked him, does Obama’s tolerance of the Muslim Brotherhood “concern you”?

Senator Maverick shot back without hesitation: “It concerns me so much that I am unalterably opposed to it. I think it would be a mistake of historic proportions.”

Senator McCain elaborated that he was “deeply, deeply concerned that this whole movement [toward democracy] could be hijacked by radical Islamic extremists.” And what, he was specifically asked, “is your assessment of the Muslim Brotherhood”? McCain pulled no punches:

I think they are a radical group that, first of all, supports sharia law; that in itself is anti-democratic — at least as far as women are concerned. They have been involved with other terrorist organizations and I believe that they should be specifically excluded from any transition government.

In fact, so apprehensive was he over the Brotherhood and its sharia agenda that McCain was quick to brand Mohamed ElBaradei, the Nobel laureate, as a Brotherhood tool. Many of us watching developments at the time noted the apparent collusion between ElBaradei and the Brothers. McCain went farther: “Oh yeah, I think it’s very clear that the scenario is very likely he could be their front man.”

Senator Straight Talk reasoned that since ElBaradei appeared to be on the same page as the Brotherhood, and was being hailed as a potential Mubarak successor despite having “no following nor political influence in Egypt,” we should assume that he must be in cahoots with the Brotherhood. It did not matter that ElBaradei was a renowned international figure and an important leftist ally of President Obama’s. So pernicious was the threat posed by the Brotherhood that, in McCain’s considered opinion, you just had to assume the worst.

The Spiegel interview was classic McCain; the senator is never at a loss for bloviation. His professed anxiety, only a year ago, over the Muslim Brotherhood, as well as his blithe willingness to assume that ElBaradei must be an Islamist coconspirator, are worth remembering today. For the sage has suddenly decided that the Brothers — unapologetic Islamic supremacists who say outright that they are on a “grand jihad” to destroy America and the West — are a pretty swell lot, after all. Instead, McCain reserves his signature “shoot first, think later” ire for the target he has always preferred: conservatives.

The Arizonan took to the Senate floor this week to lambaste five conservative members of the House who, unlike McCain, are actually serious about addressing threats the Brotherhood poses to American interests. McCain’s bipartisan “Islamic democracy” promoters seem content to keep burning through taxpayer trillions until the Brotherhood is finally running every government in the Middle East. To the contrary, the House conservatives — Michele Bachmann (Minn.), Louie Gohmert (Texas), Trent Franks (Ariz.), Tom Rooney (Fla.), and Lynn Westmorland (Ga.) — have concluded that the Brotherhood needs to be regarded as the serious anti-American business that it is.

Toward that end, the quintet is justifiably concerned that the Brotherhood’s sharia agenda — the one to which McCain used to be “unalterably opposed” — is being abetted not just by some Nobel-toting Egyptian progressive, but by officials in highly sensitive positions inside the United States government.

One official about whom they raise questions is Huma Abedin, deputy chief of staff to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Ms. Abedin has been an aide since she interned at the White House in 1996 and was assigned to the then–first lady’s staff. The family tie for which she is best known is her husband, Anthony Weiner, the New York Democrat who resigned from Congress in disgrace last year. But it is Ms. Abedin’s parents and brother who have drawn the attention of the five House GOPmembers. They all have connections to the Muslim Brotherhood — the organization itself or prominent members thereof.

For pointing this out and merely asking the State Department’s inspector general to look into it and report back to Congress — which is part of the IG’s duties under the statute that created his position — McCain & Co. (i.e., his fans in the left-wing media and his admirers in the Republican establishment) are screaming “smear” and “McCarthyism.” McCain’s antipathy toward conservatives (except during election years) is an old story. And it is no secret that he has long been smitten by Mrs. Clinton, whose transnational-progressive leanings mirror his own.

The Maverick is also a man about town — towns like Tripoli. Back in 2009, you may recall, he was an honored guest in the compound of Libya’s dictator, Moammar Qaddafi — celebrating the former master terrorist as an important American ally against jihadist terror, helping to grease the wheels so the Obama administration could increase American aid that would bolster Qaddafi’s military. Yet in the blink of an eye, it seemed, McCain would later be railing that Qaddafi was a died-in-the-wool terrorist monster whose military had to be smashed by the United States — in an undeclared, unauthorized, unprovoked war, if necessary — so Libyans could be “free” to elect the Muslim Brotherhood and other assorted Islamic supremacists to their new Parliament.

But the point is that McCain gets around. And when he does, the State Department is often his escort. Between his globetrotting and his case of Hillary hauteur, the senator has gotten friendly over the years with Ms. Abedin, who is said to be smart, able, and quite charming. Ever the Maverick — chivalrous to a fault . . . at least when the damsel in distress is an exotic, progressive sharia-democracy devotee rather than a conservative national-security worrywart from Minnesota. McCain has leapt to Ms. Abedin’s defense against these vicious House troglodytes.

The senator’s tirade featured his trademark indignation, incoherence, and infatuation with immigrant success stories. (Ms. Abedin was born in Michigan, but no reason to let that get in the way of “what is best about America.”) McCain blasted Representative Bachmann and the others, falsely accusing them of doing to his friend Huma what he had actually done to ElBaradei, namely, implicating her as “part of a nefarious conspiracy.”

To the contrary, the House members have drawn no such conclusions. Instead, they have pointed out the State Department’s dramatic, Brotherhood-friendly policy shifts during Ms. Abedin’s tenure as a top adviser to the State Department’s boss. They have asked — completely consistent with national-security guidelines, to which I’ll come shortly — that an investigation into those policy shifts be undertaken.

That investigation would include an inquiry into whether Ms. Abedin’s family ties render her unsuitable for a position that involves access to classified information about the Brotherhood. The shrieks aside, this is not remotely unreasonable, nor is it an inquisition into Ms. Abedin’s decency and rectitude. When I was a prosecutor, the Justice Department would not have let me take a case that involved friends of my family. It’s not that they didn’t trust me; it’s that government is supposed to avoid the appearance of impropriety — legitimacy hinges on the public’s belief that actions are taken on merit, not burdened by palpable conflicts of interest.

Regarding Ms. Abedin’s family ties, McCain rebukes his House colleagues for alleging “that three members of Huma’s family are ‘connected to Muslim Brotherhood operatives and/or organizations.’” “These sinister accusations,” he insisted, “rest solely on a few unspecified and unsubstantiated associations of members of Huma’s family.”

Now, I’m perfectly willing to believe that McCain may not know what the words “unspecified” and “unsubstantiated” mean. That, however, would not excuse his use of them in this context. The ties of Ms. Abedine’s father, mother, and brother to the Muslim Brotherhood are both specific and substantiated.

Read more (it gets even better)

Shoebat Exclusive: Michele Bachmann’s Critics are ‘Lions in Peace but Deer in Fight’

Walid Shoebat

While there are many chickens standing in line to peck at Rep. Michele Bachmann’s head while calling her shameful and demanding that she “fess up or shut up” perhaps its time to ask such ‘truth-phobic’ critics why they’ve chosen to indignantly point to “character assassination” when they, themselves are the actual practitioners of it. Senator John McCain, stated on the Senate floor:

“The letter (from Bachmann and four other Congressmen) alleges that three members of Huma’s family are ‘connected to Muslim Brotherhood operatives and/or organizations…’ These sinister accusations rest solely on a few unspecified and unsubstantiated associations of members of Huma’s family”.

McCain’s statements above are demonstrably false. The Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies / Islamic Trust Annual Reports of the Board of Trustees from the official government of Great Britain has Hassan Abedin – Huma’s brother – partnering with notorious Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, the spiritual head and the international liaison of the Muslim Brotherhood, a known enemy of the United States and closely works with the notorious Al-Qaeda Godfather Omar Naseef whose signature is on the document that includes Huma’s brother Hassan Abedin on his board in 2004-2005 (see page 7), 2005-2006 (see page 7), and 2007-2008 (see page 12).

How can this organization (OCIS) be ‘Pro-West’ while Naseef and Qaradawi are both actively partnering with Huma Abedin’s brother?

The following statement made by McCain on the Senate floor not only defies logic but is completely irrelevant:

“Never mind that one of those individuals, Huma’s father, passed away two decades ago.”

Ah, the sympathy card… There’s a small problem for McCain here; emotion is devoid of logic. Using his formula, Osama Bin Laden’s children should be given a pass to work in the US Government in 2031 without being vetted.

Saleha Abedin (Huma’s mother) is a leader in the Muslim Sisterhood and a member of the terror-supporting Muslim Brotherhood, which gave birth to al-Qaeda. Again, using McCain’s logic, shouldn’t we wait until 20 years after Huma’s mother croaks before Huma should be eligible to hold such a lofty position?

No one on earth can refute that Huma Abedin’s mother supports marital rape, under-age marriage, polygamy and her membership of the Muslim Brotherhood is circulated in the Arab media. These are facts that should be presented to the American people to see if they think this is all guilt by association but… facts are facts.

Siham al-Qaradawi, the daughter of Yusuf Qaradawi was awarded a scholarship in the Fulbright Academic Program in 2010-2011 in the US. If we use John McCain’s logic, we cannot reject her to work in the government as “guilt by association” just because her father, Sheikh Yousuf Qaradawi is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. After all, it was 18 years ago that he proclaimed:

“We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America, not by the sword but by our Dawa [proselytizing].”

In two years, those words will be two decades old. Can we ignore them then?

Applying McCain’s logic regarding Huma Abedin to Siham al-Qaradawi is the equivalent of a national suicide wish. McCain stated:

“…there is not one instance of an action, a decision, or a public position that Huma [Abedin] has taken while at the State Department that would lend credence to the charge that she is promoting anti-American activities within our government.”

The same applies to Siham Qaradawi. Would McCain find it acceptable for her to work in our government? Of course not. So who has lost their mind here? John McCain, the liberal media, or Bachmann? Was Bachman insane to state that:

“Most recently, the State Department shockingly decided to give Hani Nour Eldin, a member of an Egyptian designed terrorist group, a visa to not only enter the country in violation of the federal laws …”?

Bachmann’s former campaign chief – Ed Rollins – wrote that as a “Christian”, Bachmann should “seek forgiveness” for what she has done to Huma Abedin.

Politicians who behave as deer in fight and lions in peace have never made history. Churchill made it, Chamberlin did not. With respect to this issue, the Senator from Arizona has positioned himself to become John McChamberlain and The congresswoman from Minnesota just got a wink from Sir Winston.

Then we have some Rabbi by the name of Saperstein, who stated:

“The Reform Movement, and I personally, have worked with Ms. Abedin, Imam Magid and ISNA for many years. All have worked on behalf of U.S. interests at home and abroad, built relationships across religious lines and affirmed U.S. constitutional values.”

Where is Saperstein’s similar outrage at Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) President Imam Magid? Why hasn’t he called on Magid to condemn ISNA’s Louay Safi, who wrote:

“The war against the apostates [Saperstein] is carried out not to force them to accept Islam, but to enforce the Islamic law and maintain order.”

 (Louay Safi, Religion and Politics pp.121)

Did Saperstein say or do anything when Safi was chosen by ISNA and approved by our government to lecture our troops at Ft. Hood after the Jew hating murderer of innocent Americans Nidal Malik Hassan committed the massacre? This would be like bringing a Nazi to speak to American Jews right after Auschwitz.

Then we have Keith Ellison, who told Anderson Cooper on CNN:

“U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann’s allegations of a Muslim Brotherhood “deep penetration” of the federal government is “untrue” and a “phantom”.

Dare Mr. Ellison deny that Barrack Obama’s Islamic envoy Rashad Hussein, who was appointed by the government, made comments to the Musim Student Association in 2004 supporting the convicted terrorist fundraiser Sami al-Arian? Can he or anyone deny that the Muslim Brotherhood founded the Muslim Student Association and intends to destroy the U.S.?

The “proof” can be viewed in this English translation of an Arabic website.

Read more